Defunct  Municipal 
Lighting  Plants 


NINTH  EDITION 


1913 


A  List  of 

Defunct  Municipal  Lighting 

Plants 


COMPILED  AND  COPYRIGHT,   1908,   BY 

ARTHUR  HASTINGS  GRANT 


NINTH  EDITION 
REVISED  AND  ENLARGED 


PUBLISHED  BY 

The  Municipal  Ownership  Publishing  Co. 

NEW  YORK 


Preface  to  the   First  Edition. 


In  view  of  the  persistent  suppression  by  advocates  of  municipal 
ownership  of  the  real  facts  in  regard  to  municipal  lighting  plants,  it  has 
seemed  worth  while  to  prepare  a  list  of  municipalities  which  have  wholly 
or  in  part  gone  out  of  the  lighting  business  by  the  sale,  lease  or  abandon- 
ment of  their  plants.  In  almost  every  case  information  has  been  sought 
first  from  the  mayor  or  city  clerk,  and  in  cases  where  no  response  has 
been  received  from  them,  application  has  been  made  so  far  as  possible  to 
disinterested  persons,  such  as  the  editors  of  the  local  papers. 

In  a  number  of  cases  (indicated  by  an  asterisk)  these  cities  still  main- 
tain their  distributing  plants.  The  apologists  for  municipal  ownership 
are  fain  to  disregard  the  failure  of  the  generating  plants,  and  to  object  to 
these  cities  being  included  in  such  a  list  as  this.  The  fact,  however, 
remains  that  these  cities,  undertaking  to  manufacture  and  sell  electricity, 
have  found  it  more  economical  to  turn  over  to  private  enterprise  the  man- 
ufacturing end  of  the  business,  and  to  become  mere  retailers  of  the 
product.  This  is,  of  course,  due  to  the  fact  that  it  is  in  the  generating 
department  that  the  greatest  difficulties  are  encountered,  and  it  is  also 
there  that  the  failure  of  municipalities  to  keep  pace  with  the  improve- 
ments in  the  art  are  most  evident.  Such  cases  afford,  therefore,  the 
strongest  evidence  that  city  officials  whose  own  money  is  not  invested  in 
the  business,  and  whose  own  fortunes  do  not  depend  upon  its  maintaining 
a  high  degree  of  efficiency,  are  very  unlikely  to  show  the  business  push 
and  initiative  which  is  characteristic  of  private  enterprise,  and  which 
alone  in  these  days  of  rapid  progress  can  enable  a  business  to  maintain 
itself  in  the  face  of  actual  or  potential  competition. 

In  stating  the  cost  of  the  plants  it  has  unfortunately  been  impossible 
to  attain  uniformity,  as  in  many  cases  the  figures  have  been  given  for 
original  cost  only,  while  in  other  cases  the  cost  figures  include  additions 
and  extensions.  In  general,  however,  the  figures  may  be  regarded  as 
understatements,  rather  than  overstatements,  as  they  have  been  derived 
from  reports  furnished  by  the  city  officials  either  to  the  census  bureau  or 
to  the  Central  Station  List.  In  many  cases  further  inquiry  has  developed 
the  fact  that  the  figures  furnished  ignored  all  capital  costs  except  the 
original  outlay. 

On  account  of  the  difficulty  of  ascertaining  the  facts  in  regard  to 
British  plants  no  attempt  has  been  made  to  include  them  in  this  list, 


Preface  9 

although  the  transition  back  to  private  ownership  has  already  begun  in 
the  United  Kingdom,  in  spite  of  the  fact  that  British  municipal  electric 
plants  have  been  in  operation  a  much  shorter  time,  on  an  average,  than 
those  of  America. 

The  point  is  frequently  made  by  defenders  of  municipal  ownership 
that  privately  owned  lighting  plants  have  also  gone  out  of  business,  and 
that  a  large  number  of  such  plants  have  been  taken  over  by  the  munici- 
palities. In  these  latter  cases,  however,  the  sale  of  the  private  plant  has 
frequently  been  due,  not  to  any  failure  on  its  part,  but  rather  because  the 
citizens  were  made  to  believe  that  they  could  secure  equal  or  better  service 
at  a  lower  cost  from  a  municipal  standpoint.  Their  disillusionment  in  a 
majority  of  cases  has  come  as  soon  as  the  city  had  been  in  charge  long 
enough  to  make  the  results  of  its  unbusinesslike  methods  apparent,  and 
there  has  of  late  been  a  growing  tendency  to  revert  to  private  ownership. 
But  even  where  there  has  been  failure  under  private  ownership  the  loss 
has  fallen  upon  the  stockholders  and  not  upon  the  community  as  a  whole, 
as  it  does  in  the  case  of  a  municipal  failure.  For  citizens  who  have  re- 
ceived no  benefit  from  a  municipal  plant  must  pay  their  share  of  the 
taxes  levied  to  wipe  out  the  indebtedness  brought  about  by  graft  or  mis- 
management. 

In  the  Census  Report,  based  upon  statistics  for  the  year  1902,  it  was 
shown  that  the  number  of  electrical  plants  which  had  changed  from 
private  to  municipal  ownership  greatly  exceeded  the  number  which  had 
changed  from  municipal  to  private  ownership,  the  latter  being  given  as 
thirteen.  Since  then  the  tide  has  turned,  and  more  plants  are  passing 
from  municipal  to  private  operation  than  the  reverse,  the  fourteen 
months  ending  February,  1908,  having  witnessed  at  least  thirty  such 
changes, — more  than  twice  as  many  as  the  Census  Report  gave  for  all  the 
years  preceding  1903.  The  reason  of  this  is  not  far  to  seek.  In  1902  the 
great  majority  of  municipal  plants  were  only  a  few  years  old,  their 
original  installation  had  not  yet  worn  out,  and  attention  had  not  generally 
been  called  to  the  misleading  bookkeeping  which  made  possible  seemingly 
low  rates  by  ignoring  such  necessary  items  as  interest,  depreciation  and 
renewals,  legal  services  and  the  services  rendered  by  other  city  depart- 
ments at  the  cost  of  the  taxpayers.  Now,  however,  many  of  these  plants 
find  that  their  equipment  is  worn  out,  or  so  out  of  date  as  to  be  uneconom- 
ical, and  that  adequate  provision  has  not  been  made  for  paying  off  the 
original  bonded  indebtedness  or  providing  for  a  renewal  of  the  equipment. 
The  lack  of  intelligent  care  on  the  part  of  political  appointed  superin- 
tendents has  frequently  been  responsible  for  the  breakdown  of  plants 
before  the  expected  time,  while  the  rapid  development  of  the  industry  has 
made  the  old  methods  relatively  so  expensive  that  many  cities  have  found 
it  more  economical  to  pocket  their  loss  long  before  the  equipment  had 

273051 


4  Preface 

worn  out,  finding  it  cheaper  to  make  contracts  with  companies  whose 
plants  are  more  modern. 

The  list  which  follows  by  no  means  a  complete  representation  of 
the  failure  of  municipal  ownership  in  this  field,  for  it  does  not  take  into 
account  those  cases  where  cities  are  avowedly  anxious  to  dispose  of  their 
plants,  but  where  no  customer  has  yet  been  found,  nor  those  cities  where 
a  sale  of  the  plants  has  been  ordered  by  popular  vote,  but  where  the  city 
councils,  for  reasons  obvious  to  practical  politicians,  have  refused  to  carry 
out  the  popular  demand  to  be  relieved  of  the  burden.  Nor  does  it  take 
into  account  the  far  larger  number  of  cases  where  the  plants  would  be  for 
sale  if  the  citizens  were  not  deceived  by  reports  in  which,  by  a  suppression 
of  many  of  the  factors  of  cost,  a  profit  is  made  to  appear  where  there  is 
an  actual  annual  deficit.  It  is  frequently  only  when  the  plant  actually 
breaks  down  through  a  lack  of  the  necessary  expenditures  for  a  proper 
upkeep,  or  when  the  tax  rate  increases  abnormally,  that  the  citizens  wake 
to  the  fact  that  their  chosen  representatives  have  been  keeping  them  in 
ignorance  for  reasons  of  their  own.  It  should,  however,  in  fairness  be 
said  that  in  some  cases  at  least  these  misleading  reports  are  due  not  to  any 
deliberate  intention  upon  the  part  of  city  officials,  but  to  the  inevitable 
ignorance  of  men  who  are  suddenly  called  upon  to  supervise  for  a  short 
period  the  operation  of  a  complicated  business  in  which  they  have  had 
no  training  or  experience.  It  is,  however,  probably  well  within  the  facts 
to  say  that  if  the  real  condition  of  the  extant  municipal  lighting  plants  of 
this  country  were  known,  a  very  large  proportion  of  them  would  immedi- 
ately be  placed  upon  the  market. 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants. 


[N.  B. — The  cities  marked  with  an  asterisk  still  operate  their  distributing  plants.] 

AFTON,  IOWA — In  September,  1913,  a  contract  was  made  with  a  private 
company  to  supply  energy  for  operating  the  municipal  electric  lighting 
system. 

ALLEN  HURST,  N.  J. — About  four  years  ago  the  council  of  the 
borough  of  Allenhurst  found  that  the  business  had  outgrown  the  old 
municipal  plant,  and  that  a  large  expenditure  for  new  machinery  would 
be  necessary  in  order  to  keep  it  running. 

It  was  therefore  decided  to  sell  the  plant  to  a  private  company  in 
order  to  obtain  better  and  cheaper  service. 

ALEXANDRIA,  VA.— The  electric  light  plant,  built  by  the  city  in  1889, 
and  in  which  $17,000  had  been  invested,  was  sold  in  1906  for  $3,500. 
At  the  same  time  a  contract  was  made  for  street  lights  at  less  than  the 
mere  operating  cost  under  municipal  management.  The  total  annual 
saving  to  the  city  was  about  $28  for  each  arc. 

AUDUBON,  IOWA — The  municipal  electric  plant  was  sold  or  aban- 
doned prior  to  1898. 

BALLARD,  WASH. — In  1897  this  city  installed  an  electric  light  plant 
at  an  initial  cost  of  $10,600,  which  was  doubtless  increased  considerably 
during  the  ten  years  the  plant  was  operated  by  the  city.  In  1902  the  plant 
was  leased  for  fifty  years  to  a  company  which  paid  $3,800  for  the  lease 
and  its  franchise,  and  agreed  to  do  a  certain  amount  of  pumping  for  the 
city  water  works  during  the  continuance  of  the  lease.  A  well-informed 
citizen  of  Seattle  to  which  Ballard  has  been  annexed,  writes: 

"The  reason  that  the  city  of  Ballard  sold  its  municipal  lighting  plant  was  that 
the  total  income  from  this  plant  equalled  about  30  per  cent  of  the  cost  of  operat- 
ing it" 

BARNESVILLE,*  GA. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant  at  Barnes- 
ville,  after  fifteen  years  of  municipal  operation,  has  shut  down  its 
generating  plant  and  is  purchasing  current  from  the  Georgia  Railway 
and  Power  Company. 


«  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

BATESBURG,  S.  C. — The  municipal  electric  plant,  installed  at  a  cost  of 
$20,000,  has,  according  to  the  mayor,  been  leased  to  an  individual 
•operator. 

BERKELEY,  CAL. — The  following  information  has  been  furnished  by 
the  town  clerk: 

"The  town  of  Berkeley  once  owned  an  electric  light  plant,  but  it  has  not  yet 
sold  the  same.  The  town  bought  up  a  franchise  previously  granted,  and,  by  a  bond 
issue,  raised  $30,000  to  cover  the  cost  of  the  franchise  and  the  installation  of  the 
plant.  This  happened  in  1889.  The  town  maintained  the  plant  for  ten  years  but  on 
the  arrival  in  Berkeley  of  a  competing  company,  with  newer  and  modern  ma- 
chinery, etc.,  the  plant  belonging  to  the  town  was  not  considered  worth  continuing. 

"Upon  the  arrival  of  the  competing  firm,  the  town  ('town*  is  the  technical  desig- 
nation of  Berkeley,  although  it  has  a  population  of  over  40,000)  advertised  to  lease 
the  plant.  Since  that  time  every  two  years,  the  Berkeley  Electric  Lighting  Com- 
pany, a  private  concern,  leases  the  plant,  or  what  remains  of  it,  which  I  do  not 
believe  could  be  disposed  of  for  more  than  $8,000  or  $10,000." 

BEVERLY,  OHIO — After  several  years  of  service  the  electric  light 
plant  was  sold  in  May,  1907.  The  village  clerk  wrote  in  explanation: 

"Will  say  the  greatest  reason  for  selling  the  plant  was  that  the  village  could 
get  no  satisfactory  service  from  plant  in  the  manner  it  was  being  handled.  The 
plant  has  been  sold  to  local  parties  with  the  hope  of  getting  better  service  in  the 
future." 

BOURBON,  IND. — Some  time  prior  to  1902  this  town  contracted  for  an 
electric  light  plant  and  issued  bonds  in  payment  therefor.  On  the  ground 
that  it  had  not  been  constructed  in  accordance  with  the  specifications  the 
town  refused  to  accept  it,  and  the  bondholders  were  compelled  to  take 
over  the  plant  in  order  to  protect  themselves. 

BOWLING  GREEN,  OHIO — The  following  information  was  furnished 
by  the  Mayor  in  1908: 

"Our  city  did  venture  in  the  natural  gas  business,  in  opposition  to  a  home  com- 
pany. Our  city  'dads'  went  in  at  $60,000  and  sold  out  to  the  company  three  years 
later  at  one-tenth  the  cost  of  the  speculation — $6,000.  The  bonds  have  been 
drowned  in  interest  and  some  are  still  unpaid.  The  gas  was  used  for  fuel  and 
lighting  purposes  and  was  a  very  poor  venture  for  the  city." 

The  plant  was  sold  in  1899  and  was  not  in  operation  more  than 
five  years. 

Another  authority  states  that  the  plant  cost  the  city  about  $110,000. 
Although  these  statements  apparently  conflict,  they  are  probably  both 
correct,  as  the  interest  on  the  investment  was  paid  out  of  taxes,  the  plant 
earning  only  its  bare  operating  expenses. 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  7 

BOWMANVILLE,  ONI—  The  town  clerk  writes : 

"The  town  only  had  the  electic  light  plant  for  one  year.  As  it  was  worn  out 
and  required  a  large  amount  of  money  to  be  spent  for  renewal  the  council  decided 
to  sell  to  the  Seymour  Power  Company." 

BRADFORD,  OHIO — In  answer  to  an  enquiry,  the  mayor  wrote : 
"We  operated  electric  plant  under  lease.  It  burned  in  December,  1892,  and  has 
been  in  litigation  since.  We  were  sued  by  owner,  who  recovered  on  suit  for 
destruction  of  building  on  the  ground  of  negligence — employes  said  to  have  been 
drunk — and  have  just  compromised  on  machinery.  The  total  loss  to  the  city  has 
been  near  $9,000.  A  plant  is  now  being  constructed  by  a  private  corporation  to 
furnish  street  and  commercial  lights." 

One  result  of  this  experiment  was  to  deprive  the  city  of  an  electric 
light  plant  for  sixteen  years. 

BRAIDWOOD,  ILL. — The  lighting  plant  at  Braidwood  was  sold  to  the 
Public  Service  Corporation  of  Northern  Illinois  in  1910,  after  nearly 
twenty  years  of  municipal  operation. 

"Public  Service"  quotes  Alderman  Howatt,  chairman  of  the  electric 
light  committee  of  the  village  council,  as  stating  that  Braidwood  will 
be  out  of  debt  at  the  end  of  this  year  for  the  first  time  in  twenty  years ; 
and  also  gives  the  following  table,  compiled  by  Alderman  Howatt,  to 
show  the  receipts  and  expenditures  of  the  plant  for  1909,  and  to  illustrate 
the  manner  in  which  the  plant  was  conducted  during  twenty  years  of 
municipal  ownership. 

EXPENSES   FOR  THE  YEAR   1909. 

Operating  expenses $4,000 

Interest  at  5  per  cent  on  investment 600 

Depreciation  at  5  per  cent 600 

Repairs  and   upkeep    , 400 

Insurance  .  100 


Total  Expenses $5,700 

INCOME  ALL  SOURCES  FOR  1909. 

Residence  and  commercial  lighting  $2,150 

Street   lights 1,278 

Sale  of  water 150 

Total  Receipts $3,578 

Total  expenses    $5,700 

Total   receipts    3,578 

Loss  to  taxpayers  for  year $2,122 

Prior  to  1909  the  tax  rate  in  Braidwood  had  been  climbing  steadily,  and  in  that 
year  the  levy  was  $3,000 ;  higher  than  it  had  ever  been,  and  all  because  of  the  light 
and  water  plant  drain. 


8  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

In  contrast,  after  the  village  disposed  of  the  plant  to  the  Public  Service  Com- 
pany of  Northern  Illinois,  the  tax  levy  in  1910  went  back  to  $1,500,  and  it  was  the 
same  last  year. 

BROWNSTOWN,  IND. — In  1908  this  town  sold  to  a  private  company 
the  water  and  electric  plant  which  it  had  installed  at  a  cost  of  $26,260. 

A  citizen,  explaining  the  failure,  says  that  the  change  of  officials  with 
every  election  meant  a  change  of  the  municipal  employees,  "hence  poor 
work  and  poor  service." 

BRUNSWICK,  Mo. — In  1906  the  mayor  wrote: 

"Brunswick,  about  twelve  years  ago,  built  an  electric  light  plant  and  water-works, 
and  about  a|  year  and  a  half  ago  was  very  happy  to  be  able  to  sell  the  same  for 
about  35  cents  on  the  dollar  of  cost,  taking  the  pay  in  light  and  water  service.  The 
ownership  of  the  plant  ran  the  city  in  debt  very  much  and  the  service  was  not 
nearly  so  satisfactory  as  it  is  now  under  private  ownership ;  nor  was  it  any  cheaper. 
Our  city  is  now  beginning*  to  crawl  out  of  debt,  made  by  owning  the  light  and 
water  plant.  You  could  not  give  Brunswick  such  a  plant  under  the  condition  that 
the  city  should]  run  the  business." 

When  the  plant  was  sold  there  were  $10,000  six  per  cent  bonds 
outstanding. 

BUCKLEY,  ILL. — On  June  23, 1913,  arrangements  were  completed  by  the 
Village  Board  to  sell  the  municipal  electric  light  plant  to  a  private  com- 
pany. 

The  village  president  writes: 

"Our  reason  for  so  doing  was  on  account  of  the  fact  that  our  plant  was  too  small, 
and  it  was  a  matter  of  either  enlarging  it  or  taking  current  from  another  source. 
We  made  a  mistake  when  we  installed  our  plant,  and  so  thought  it  advisable  to 
sell  out." 

BUENA  VISTA,  VA. — This  electric  plant  was  operated  by  the  city 
for  about  five  years,  but  in  1895  was  sold  to  a  private  company  because 
it  proved  a  losing  proposition.  In  the  words  of  the  mayor,  "it  was  too 
expensive." 

BURLINGTON,  N.  C. — The  municipal  electric  light  and  power  plant, 
installed  in  1904  at  a  cost  of  $20,000,  was  sold  in  February,  1913,  to  a 
private  company. 

CARROLLTON,  GA. — An  electric  light  plant  was  bought  about  1893 
by  the  city  council,  but  was  operated  only  a  few  months  on  account  of  the 
protests  of  the  citizens,  and  was  turned  over  to  the  former  owners. 

CASSELTON,  N.  D. — As  stated  by  a  leading  citizen,  the  causes  which 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  9 

led  to  the  abandonment  of  the  municipal  lighting  plant  in  this  city  were 
as  follows: 

"1st.  The  plant  was  installed  by  a  city  council  who  were  entirely  ignorant  of 
what  was  necessary,  consequently  poor  equipment. 

"2nd.  The  employment  of  cheap  men,  thereby  getting  poor  and  inefficient  men, 
and  consequently  giving  poor  and  unreliable  service  with  frequent  shut-downs  for 
repairs. 

"3rd.  Starting  out  with  a  very  low  rate,  which  resulted  in  a  large  deficit  every 
year,  which  had  to  be  made  up  by  a  general  tax. 

"4th.  The  tendency  of  each  incoming  council  to  reverse  the  policy  of  the  last 
council,  without  much  regard  as  to  whether  it  would  improve  the  service  or  not. 

"The  result  was  the  plant  was  sold  out  for  about  two-fifths  of  the  original  cost, 
to  say  nothing  of  what  had  been  appropriated  to  make  the  repairs  and  general  de- 
ficiencies of  revenue  under  expenses." 

The  plant  was  installed  in  1897  at  a  cost  of  $6,000,  and  was  sold 
about  1903. 

CHARLOTTE,  MICH. — The  municipal  electric  plant  was  sold  to  a 
private  company  in  1907.  The  town  clerk  writes : 

"Our  city  was  dissatisfied  with  municipal  ownership  and  sold  its  plant  and  entire 
outfit  to  the  Consumers  Power  Company,  which  is  now  giving  excellent  satis- 
faction." 

CHARLOTTE,  N.  Y.— In  1897  a  municipal  electric  plant  was  installed  at 
a  cost  of  $75,000.  The  village  clerk  writes : 

"The  village  disposed  of  its  distributing  system  to  the  Rochester  Railway  and 
Light  Co.  on  January  1,  1913.  Owing  to  the  fact  that  it  was  run  down  so  that  it 
would  require  the  expenditure  of  a  considerable  sum  of  money  the  people  voted 
to  sell  it  for  the  sum  of  $12,700." 

CHEHALIS,  WASH^— In  1908  the  mayor  wrote  in  regard  to  the 
electric  light  plant: 

"The  city  owns  the  plant,  which  was  leased  some  time  ago  to  a  private  party. 
That  party  now  owns  nearly  all  the  machinery  connected  with  the  plant.  The  city, 
at  the  time  it  operated  the  plant,  did  not  make  a  financial  success  for  the  reason 
that  the  city  was  at  that  time  very  small  and  in  dishonest  hands — so  the  story 
goes." 

Since  then  Chehalis  has  given  the  Washington-Oregon  Corporation 
a  fifty  year  franchise. 

The  machinery  was  badly  used  up,  and  all  that  was  left  of  the  plant 
is  said  to  have  been  sold  for  $2,800. 

CHERAW,*  S.  C. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant,  which  began 
operation  in  1904,  has  been  buying  current  from  a  private  company  since 
May,  1912.  The  city  clerk  writes : 

"Our  boilers  used  too  much  fuel  and  our  load  was  too  heavy  for  the  dynamos. 
This  and  mismanagement  caused  the  failure  of  municipal  operation." 


10  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

CHESTER,  S.  C. — In  1908  the  municipal  electric  lighting  plant  was 
sold  to  a  private  company.  The  city  engineer  writes : 

"At  the  time  the  sale  was  made  our  old  plant  was  overloaded  to  the  point  of 
break-down,  and  it  was  up  to  the  city  to  either  build  a  new  steam-plant  at  a  cost 
approximately  of  $30,000,  or  to  get  the  Southern  Power  Company,  a  corporation 
which  owned  a  hydro-electric  plant  about  twenty  miles  distant,  to  come  to  the  city 
and  sell  us  current." 

CHRISTIANSBURG,  VA. — An  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in  1900 
at  a  cost  of  $10,000.  Five  or  six  years  later  the  generating  plant  was 
shut  down  and  power  purchased  from  a  private  company.  In  January, 
1908,  the  distributing  plant  was  sold,  the  experiment  having  proved  very 
expensive,  according  to  reports.  The  mayor  wrote  as  follows : 

"We  had  several  reasons  for  disposing  of  our  electric  system.  First,  we  only 
owned  the  lines  in  and  within  a  radius  of  one  mile  of  our  corporate  limits.  The 
power  is  generated  about  15  miles  from  our  town,  and  is  furnished  by  the  Grayson 
Electric  Co.  J.  L.  Vaughan  Co.  have  purchased  our  rights  and  the  Grayson  plant. 
We  expect  street  car  and  other  improvements  under  individual  management  that 
we  could  not  under  municipal.  Christiansburg  is  bettered  financially  and  we  are 
sure  that  we  have  made  a  good  deal  for  our  town." 

CHURUBUSCO,  IND. — The  plant  is  said  to  have  cost  $25,000,  and  to 
have  gone  into  the  hands  of  a  receiver  when  the  first  bond  became  due, 
as  there  were  no  funds  wherewith  to  pay  it. 

CLARION,  IOWA — A  letter  from  the  editor  of  the  Clarion  Monitor 
states  that  the  municipal  plant,  installed  some  16  or  17  years  ago,  at  a 
cost  variously  estimated  at  from  $12,000  to  $15,000,  was  sold  in  April, 
1911,  for  $8,900. 

"The  members  of  the  council  were  inexperienced  in  electrical  machinery  and, 
consequently,  were  obliged  to  depend  on  the  judgment  of  others.  The  councilmen 
are  paid  only  $50  a  year.  Men  who  make  good  councilmen  usually  have  business  of 
their  own.  The  management  of  the  plant  was  subject  to  the  whims  of  the  voters 
and  changes  were  frequent.  The  town  lost  money  for  the  reasons  that  'what's 
everybody's  business  is  nobody's  business,'  too  many  leaks  and  incompetent  help." 

CLAYTON,  ILL. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant  was  installed  in 
1895  at  a  cost  of  $10,000.  Under  date  of  October  9th,  1913,  the  mayor 
writes  as  follows : 

"Our  lighting  plant  was  sold  last  February  to  the  Central  Illinois  Public  Service 
Company,  of  Mattoon,  111.  The  plant  was  a  failure— no  annual  reports  were  pub- 
lished. When  the  plant  was  started  the  rates  were  so  low  that  nothing  could  be 
set  aside  for  depreciation;  after  16  years  the  plant  was  so  badly  run  down  that  it 
needed  almost  an  entire  rehabilitation.  To  do  this  would  have  necessitated 
bonding  the  town,  which  the  people  did  not  want  to  do.  They  were  glad  of  a 
chance  to  sell." 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  11 

COAL  CITY,  ILL. — The  village  in  July,  1910,  sold  its  municipal  light- 
ing plant  to  a  private  company  for  $16,500,  which  was  about  fifty  cents 
on  the  dollar. 

This  plant  had  been  in  service  something  over  fifteen  years  and 
was  losing  more  than  two  thousand  dollars  per  year. 

COLFAX,  IOWA — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant,  in  operation 
since  1894,  and  built  at  a  cost  of  $17,500  has  been  sold  to  F.  L.  Breeder. 

COLUMBIA,  ALA. — This  town  installed  an  electric  plant  in  1906  at  a 
cost  of  $15,000.  It  was  operated  at  a  loss  for  two  years  and  was  then 
leased  to  the  electrician  who  supervised  its  construction. 

CONCORD,*  N.  C. — The  generating  plant  was  shut  down  in  1907, 
when  the  town  began  purchasing  current.  The  superintendent  writes: 

"We  found  that  we  could  buy  power  from  the  Southern  Power  Co.  cheaper 
than  we  could  make  it — hence  the  change." 

COUNCIL  GROVE,  KAN. — A  disinterested  citizen  writes : 

"City  formerly  owned  the  electric  light  plant,  but  made  a  failure  of  operating  it 
and  sold  dynamo,  engine  and  wiring  for  $650.  The  present  company  rebuilt  the 
entire  system  and  is  giving  satisfaction.  The  rate  was  a  little  lower  under  city 
control,  but  did  not  meet  expenses." 

The  plant  was  bonded  for  $9,000. 

CRIDERSVILLE,  OHIO — Except  for  the  sake  of  completeness  it  would 
not  be  fair  to  include  this  plant  in  the  list,  as  the  ownership  was  not  vol- 
untary and  was  terminated  as  soon  as  possible ;  for,  when  the  village  was 
forced  to  foreclose  the  mortgage  it  held  on  the  local  lighting  plant,  it 
promptly  turned  around  and  sold  the  plant  to  private  parties. 

CUBA,  ILL. — The  municipal  lighting  plant,  which  began  operation 
in  1900,  was  sold  on  August  13,  1912.  The  city  clerk  writes : 

"The  purchaser  of  our  plant  has  agreed  to  give  an  all  day  and  all  night  service, 
which  we  were  unable  to  have  before  because  the  amount  of  current  used  was  too 
small  to  justify  a  24-hour  service." 

CUBA  CITY,*  Wis. — The  village  clerk  writes  in  April,  1912: 
"The  municipal  plant  here  is  still  owned  by  the  city,  but  the  machinery  is  for 

sale,  as  the  village  is  now  getting  its  current' from  the  Inter-state  Light  and  Power 

Company. 

"The  difference  is,  we  buy  the  current  instead  of  making  it,  and  we  have  day 
and  night  service." 


IS  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

DALTON,*  GA. — A  franchise  was  granted  in  February,  1913,  to  the 
'Georgia  Railway  and  Light  Company  to  furnish  power  for  the  Dalton 
municipal  electric  lighting  plant.  This  plant  was  installed  in  19'03.  The 
editor  of  the  Dalton  Citizen  says  in  a  letter : 

"So  far  as  Dalton  is  concerned,  municipal  ownership  is  a  complete  failure. 
Dalton  has  about  7,000  people  and  owns  its  water  works,  electric  plant  and  gas 
works.  Neither  one  of  these  enterprises  pay.  The  chief  reason  is  that  they  are 
inefficiently  managed;  another  reason  is  that  the  plants  were  badly  constructed  as 
a  result  of  very  poor  engineering.  This  kind  of  engineering  would  never  have 
been  permitted  by  a  private  corporation.  A  private  corporation  would  have  gone 
about  the  building  of  these  plants  in  a  business  like  way  with  contracts  drawn  so 
that  the  plants  would  be  up-to-date  and  absolutely  efficient. 

"Municipal  ownership  is  not  the  success  it  should  be  because  too  little  attention 
is  paid  it  by  those  governing  the  city.  There  are  a  great  many  towns  in  this  state 
that  own  the  public  utilities,  and  there  is  only  one  of  them  that,  to  my  knowledge, 
broke  even  last  year,  at  the  same  time  rendering  service  that  the  people  demanded. 
In  this  connection  I  will  state  that  at  one  time  I  was  heartily  in  sympathy  with 
municipal  ownership;  but  seeing  its  complete  failure  as  a  result  of  bad  manage- 
ment and  inattention,  I  have  come  to  the  conclusion  that  it  is  a  failure." 

A  soap  box  primary  showed  that  a  large  majority  of  the  citizens  favored 
selling  the  municipal  electric  light  and  water  plants.  One  voter  wrote  on 
his  ticket,  "Can't  sell ;  give  it  away  and  stop  expense." 

DAYTON,  TENN. — Some  years  ago  this  city  purchased  or  leased  an 
electric  plant,  but  was  compelled  to  retire  from  the  business  because  the 
expense  of  running  it  was  about  three  times  the  cost  of  contracting  for 
lights  from  a  company. 

DELANO,  MINN. — After  eighteen  years  of  municipal  operation  the 
municipal  electric  lighting  plant  has  been  taken  over  by  a  private  com- 
pany. The  editor  of  the  Delano  Eagle  writes: 

"The  old  plant  was  too  small;  it  was  out  of  date,  worn  out  and  in  the  wrong! 
place.  We  only  got  service  from  sundown  to  11:30  p.  m. 

"The  service  was  very  poor  and  there  was  no  likelihood  that  the;  people  would 
bond  for  a  new  plant.  Hence  when  an  offer  was  made  for  the  old  plant,  and 
there  was  an  opportunity  to  get  the  24-hour  service  at  reasonable  rates,  it  was 
immediately  accepted. 

"According  to  the  last  village  balance  sheet  the  receipts  for  the  electric  light 
service  were  about  $1,000  less  than  the  expenses— to  say  nothing  of  providing  for 
interest  on  bonds  and  for  their  retirement,  which  fell  on  the  general  fund." 

DELTA,  IOWA — "Municipal  ownership  of  the  city  gas  plant  has  been 
a  losing  proposition  here.  The  plant  has  been  turned  over  to  a  Richland 
man,  who  agrees  to  run  the  plant  and  give  the  city  $1.40  gas.  For  a  long 
time  the  light  plant  has  been  causing  the  members  of  the  town  council  to 
'lay  awake  nights/  for,  to  tell  the  plain,  unvarnished  truth,  the  Delta 
gas  plant  is  a  losing  proposition,  and  is  a  great  big  elephant,  or  something- 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  13 

or-other,  on  the  hands  of  the  council,  and  they  have  been  looking  around 
for  some  way  to  relieve  the  situation.  Like  the  Irishman  who  snaked 
up  and  caught  the  wildcat  by  the  tail  and  began  swinging  it  around, 
afterward  finding  out  that  it  was  not  what  he  had  thought  it  was.  He 
yelled  lustily  to  his  friend,  Pat,  'For  God's  sake,  come  and  help  me  let  go 
of  the  dom  thing.'  "—Light. 

DEXTER,  MICH. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant,  installed  in 
1904,  at  a  cost  of  $12,000,  has  recently  been  sold  to  the  Eastern  Michigan 
Edison  Company.  The  plant  was  sold  at  its  appraised  value,  $9,000,  and 
the  village  granted  a  30-year  franchise  to  the  company.  The  village 
president  writes: 

"We  want  street  lights  all  night,  and  commercial  lights  day  and  night.  We  have 
had  light  only  up  to  one  o'clock  at  night.  This  Edison  Company  gives  us  continu- 
ous light,  so  we  can  have  it  when  we  want  it,  at  a  price  that  we  could  not  possibly 
make  it  with  our  system." 

DEXTER,  Mo. — The  municipal  electric  plant,  installed  in  1896  at  a 
cost  of  $16,000,  was  leased  to  its  former  manager  in  1905.  The  plant 
was  sold  to  its  present  owner  in  1910  for  $5,150.  The  city  is  said  to 
have  lost  $100  each  month  on  operation. 

DULUTH,*  MINN. — To  those  unfamiliar  with  the  facts — the  reports 
assiduously  circulated  about  the  gas  department  of  this  city  would  give 
the  impression  that  the  profits  reported  are  the  result  of  municipal  opera- 
tion. This  is,  however,  far  from  the  truth,  for  in  1904  the  city  shut  down 
the  generating  plant  which  it  had  purchased  only  six  years  before,  and 
since  that  date  it  has  been  merely  a  distributor  of  the  gas  made  by  a 
private  company. 

During  the  five  complete  years  (1899-1903)  that  the  city  made  its 
own  gas  the  average  cost  per  thousand  feet  was  $1.20  and  the  receipts 
$1.17.  In  these  cost  figures  there  is  no  allowance  for  depreciation,  lost 
taxes,  accidents,  legal  services,  etc.  A  very  moderate  allowance  for  these 
would  greatly  increase  the  loss  per  thousand,  and  if  private  enterprise 
had  not  come  to  its  relief  the  gas  plant  would  have  ultimately  proved  a 
grievous  burden,  although  so  far  as  possible  it  had  been  removed  from 
political  influences. 

The  reductions  in  price  of  gas  made  by  the  city  while  it  was  oper- 
ating the  plant  were  due  largely  to  the  great  increase  in  demand  resulting 
from  the  rapid  increase  in  the  use  of  gas  for  fuel  purposes,  as  well  as  to 
improvements  in  the  art  of  manufacture;  but  in  no  case  were  they  war- 
ranted, for  the  real  cost  was  always  in  excess  of  the  net  price. 

The  reduction  in  price  since  the  city  abandoned  the  manufacture  of 
gas  is  due  to  the  private  enterprise  of  the  coking  plant  which  supplies 


14  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

gas  as  a  by-product  to  the  city,  and  which  has  spent  many  thousands  of 
dollars  in  exploiting  the  gas  to  increase  its  sales.  As  a  gas  expert,  who 
has  no  interest  in  this  company,  writes : 

"Of  course  this  is  very  fine  for  the  citizens  of  Duluth,  but  it  is  not  municipal 
ownership,  as  the  city  is  freed  from  the  two  factors  which  ordinarily  are  the  worst 
features  of  municipal  plants,  to  wit:  lack  of  proper  handling  of  the  manufacturing 
end  of  the  business,  and  lack  of  push  in  exploiting  the  commercial  side.  In  short, 
tke  city  of  Duluth  simply  distributes  the  gas  and  collects  the  bills." 

DUNKIRK,  IND. — In  1901  the  city  purchased  the  electric  light  plant, 
assuming  the  bonded  indebtedness  of  $23,500.  As  it  was  not  paying  its 
way  the  city  effected  a  compromise  with  the  bondholders,  to  whom  the 
plant  was  turned  over  in  1904,  the  city  making  a  cash  payment  of  $2,300. 
The  mayor  writes  that  the  sale  was  due  to  "political  changes  in  control." 

Another  citizen  of  Dunkirk  writes  as  follows : 

"The  city  was  each  month  in  the  hole  and  had  to  use  up  the  street  and  alley 
fund  to  keep  the  lighting  plant  running.  A  blacksmith  was  called  in  to  make  any 
repairs  that  were  necessary  on  the  boilers  and  machinery.  General  incompetency 
along  the  whole  line  made  it  impossible  for  the  city  to  make  interest  on  its 
bonds." 

EAST  CHICAGO,  IND. — The  electric  plant  was  purchased  from  a  private 
company  in  1900  for  $34,500.  In  1903  a  receiver  was  appointed,  and  as 
the  city  was  unable  to  redeem  the  plant  it  was  sold  in  1907  together  with 
a  25-year  franchise. 

EAST  GRAND  FORKS,*  MINN. — The  burning  down  of  the  electric  light 
plant  in  March,  1907,  settled  the  question  of  its  abandonment,  which  was 
under  discussion  prior  to  the  fire.  Five  days  after  the  fire,  at  a  mass- 
meeting  of  the  citizens,  it  was  decided  by  an  almost  unanimous  vote  not 
to  rebuild  the  plant,  and  to  make  a  five-year  contract  for  current  with  a 
company  in  an  adjoining  town. 

A  well-informed  correspondent  writes  that  "the  plant  has  furnished  a 
somewhat  indifferent  service,  and  did  not  earn  enough  to  pay  the  fuel 
and  labor  accounts,  to  say  nothing  about  interest  on  investment,  deprecia- 
tion, etc.,"  in  spite  of  its  charging  private  customers  $120  a  year  for 
1,200-c.p.  arcs  on  moonlight  schedule. 

As  East  Grand  Forks  is  a  border  town  and  right  across  the  line  in 
North  Dakota  (a  prohibition  state)  is  the  city  of  Grand  Forks,  about  90 
per  cent  of  the  business  houses  in  East  Grand  Forks  are  saloons.  Many 
of  these  got  their  electric  lights  from  a  private  company  in  Grand  Forks, 
because  the  service  was  better  and  the  price  lower,  until  the  council  passed 
a  resolution  to  the  effect  that  no  saloon  would  be  licensed  unless  it 
patronized  the  municipal  plant  \ 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  15 

EDGEWOOD,  GA. — The  municipal  electric  plant,  installed  in  1907  at  a 
cost  of  $15,000,  was  shut  down  in  1908  when  Edgewood  was  annexed  to 
Atlanta,  the  latter  city  being  satisfactorily  served  by  a  private  company. 
The  plant  has  been  sold. 

ELGIN,  ILL. — In  1888  a  municipal  lighting  plant  was  installed  in  Elgin. 
In  1904  the  plant  was  leased  to  a  private  company.  While  the  plant  was 
in  the  hands  of  the  city,  Elgin  was  hailed  as  a  shining  example  by  munici- 
pal ownership  enthusiasts,  but  later  municipal  operation  was  discovered 
to  have  been  the  most  dismal  of  failures. 

The  loss,  during  the  period  of  operation,  is  said  to  have  been  at  least 
$100,000  as  compared  with  what  it  would  have  cost  to  light  the  streets 
by  contract.  At  the  time  when  the  plant  was  taken  over  by  the  private 
company  it  was  practically  worn  out.  The  original  cost  of  the  plant  was 
$30,000,  which  is  an  additional  loss  to  the  city. 

In  1907  a  well-informed  citizen  gave  the  following  data  in  regard  to 
the  plant: 

"Under  municipal  control  247  lamps  were  operated  one  year  at  the  cost  of 
$28,000,  in  contrast  to  the  contract  price  made  by  the  private  company  of  $14,326. 
In  1905  the  city  electrician  showed  that  the  cost  of  producing  light  for  commercial 
purposes  alone  was  $7,800  per  year,  while  receipts  were  $6,200.  An  investigation 
by  the  city  finance  committee,  however,  made  the  discovery  that  the  actual  cost 
of  producing  current  was  $9,500.  According  to  reports  from  the  plant,  it  was 
easily  costing  the  city  $3,000  per  month  for  operation,  or  $36,000  per  year.  Under 
the  arrangement  made  by  the  private  company,  the  same  number  of  lights  would 
cost  about  $16,500,  less  than  half  the  amount  under  municipal  operation.  There 
was  a  great  deal  of  general  dissatisfaction  in  regard  to  the  'suicidal  flat  rate,' 
which  resulted  in  reckless  waste  of  current  and  jealousies  among  patrons  spring- 
ing from  the  discriminations  made  under  this  system.  Under  private  operation, 
the  meter  system  is  employed,  to  the  general  satisfaction  of  the  public." 

A  city  official,  quoted  in  "The  Business  of  Municipalities  and  Private 
Corporations  Compared,"  gives  $106.73  as  a  moderate  estimate  of  the 
annual  cost  per  arc.  He  says : 

"The  electrician's  report  shows  that  the  city  has  been  selling  light  for  from  25 
per  cent  to  50  per  cent  less  than  the  cost  of  manufacture.  Members  of  the  electric 
light  department  admitted  they  could  not  run  economically  for  less  than  $35,000 
per  year,  but  they  wanted  $45,000.f  Under  our  contract  with  the  private  com- 
pany we  light  the  same  number  of  lamps  and  more  hours  per  year  for  $15,654,  f  a 
saving  of  $20,000  per  year  figuring  operating  expenses  only.  Statements  from  the 
light  department  show  that  if  proper  attention  had  been  given  to  repairs  of  lamps, 
at  least  $2,000  in  coal  would  have  been  saved.  Hardly  a  joint  in  our  whole  45 
mile  circuit  is  soldered  or  wrapped;  they  are  simply  twisted  together.  There  is  no 
estimate  of  the  enormous  loss  of  current  over  such  loose  joints  and  yet  it  has 
been  so  for  sixteen  years." 

f  Another  authority  states  that  these  figures  should  be  $42,000  and  $14,326 
respectively. 


16  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

The  following  story  shows  how  this  plant  was  made  to  serve  the 
private  ends  of  the  politicians.  A  mayor,  who  was  a  candidate  for  re- 
election, attended  a  dance  given  by  a  local  lodge.  Noticing  how  bril- 
liantly the  hall  was  lighted  with  electric  lamps,  the  mayor  said:  "How 
much  do  you  boys  pay  for  these  lights?"  He  was  told  $35  per  month. 
"I  will  do  it  for  $10,"  replied  the  mayor. 

ELLISVILLE,  Miss. — There  has  been  an  almost  unanimous  vote  in  Ellis- 
ville.  Mississippi,  favoring  the  sale  of  the  lighting  plant  to  a  private 
company.  The  mayor  writes  under  date  of  May  11,  1912 : 

"Our  electric  plant  was  not  a  paying  investment  by  any  means.  It  was  the 
desire  of  the  people  that  it  should  be  sold." 

ELLWOOD  CITY,*  PA. — An  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in  1901 
at  a  cost  of  $15,000.  By  1904  it  had  become  inadequate  to  carry  its  load; 
so  the  generating  plant  was  shut  down  and  has  stood  idle  ever  since, 
power  being  supplied  by  a  private  company.  A  writer  in  the  Ellwood 
Citizen  shows  that,  allowing  only  five  per  cent  for  depreciation,  the  street 
arcs  cost  more  than  $100  each  for  the  year  ending  April  1,  1903. 

EMAUS,  PA. — The  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in  1890,  and  sold 
five  years  later  at  about  one-third  of  its  cost.  The  borough  clerk  states 
that  the  reason  for  abandoning  the  plant  was  chiefly  its  heavy  expense, 
the  lights  costing  considerably  more  than  the  borough  could  get  them  for 
from  a  private  company. 

EMPORIA,  KAN. — "The  electric-lighting  system  of  Emporia,  Kan.,  at 
one  time  owned  by  the  local  combination  gas  company,  was  purchased 
by  the  city  nearly  fifteen  years  ago.  For  thirteen  and  one-half  years  it 
was  then  operated  as  a  municipal  plant,  following  which,  in  April,  1911, 
it  was  leased  by  a  private  syndicate  which  now  operates  it.  During  the 
period  of  its  service  as  a  city  undertaking  the  property  was  managed  by 
the  same  man  who  has  since  been  in  charge  for  private  capital,  so  that 
an  excellent  opportunity  is  here  afforded  to  compare  the  limitations  and 
advantages  of  municipal  and  corporate  operation,  assuming  the  important 
factor  of  managerial  skill  and  acumen  to  have  remained  practically  con- 
stant throughout  both  periods.  In  fact,  the  former  Emporia  situation 
was  an  example  of  the  best  conditions  of  municipal  operation,  wherein 
a  capable  manager  was  retained  in  his  position  throughout  the  terms  of 
three  different  political  parties  and  the  operating  force  did  not  fluctuate 
with  varying  political  fortunes.  The  question  of  renting  the  plant  and 
abolishing  municipal  service  was  voted  upon  by  the  people  of  Emporia 
and  the  proposition  thoroughly  approved  before  action  was  taken.  Since 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  17 

taking  over  the  property  the  tenant  company  has  expended  $55,000  in  im- 
provements at  the  generating  station,  including  the  installation  of  a  500- 
kw  steam  turbine.  The  existing  municipal  equipment  comprised  one 
150-kw  and  one  36.0-kw  engine-driven  alternator  and  four  150-hp  boilers. 
The  larger  engine  set  is  now  being  operated  regularly  with  the  turbine. 
Extending-  the  distribution  system  by  more  than  100  per  cent  of  its  former 
scope,  many  new  lines  have  been  opened  up  to  outlying  territory  and  new 
customers  taken  on  who  have  long  clamored  for  service." — Electrical 
World, 

ENGLAND,  ARK. — In  1907  the  city  council  leased  the  electric  light 
and  water  plants,  installed  in  1900,  for  six  years.  An  inquiry  as  to  the 
cause  of  this  action  brought  the  following  reply: 

"The  reason  that  the  town  wanted  to  lease  these  was  because  for  it  to  operate 
them  was  a  losing  game,  and  it  could  not  afford  it." 

Another  correspondent  assigns  "gross  mismanagement"  as  the  cause. 

ENGLISH,  IND. — The  mayor  writes  that  the  electric  plant  was  sold 
in  1907  for  35  per  cent  of  its  cost  "because  of  the  financial  loss  to  the 
city."  As  it  had  been  operated  only  seven  years,  this  makes  the  depre- 
ciation 9  per  cent  a  year. 

ESCANABA,*  MICH. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant  was  installed 
in  1900  at  a  cost  of  $70,000.  In  1908  the  generating  plant  was  closed 
down,  a  ten-year  contract  having  been  made  with  a  private  company  to 
furnish  current.  As  far  back  as  1905  the  finance  committee  of  the  city 
council  advised  selling  the  plant  on  the  ground  that  it  was  losing  money. 
In  1907  an  attempt  was  made  to  bolster  up  the  plant  by  having  a  special 
audit,  the  report  of  which  showed  a  generous  profit  by  the  usual  methods 
of  suppressing  some  of  the  large  cost  factors.  When,  however,  it  was 
found  that  $15,000  or  $20,000  would  have  to  be  spent  on  renewing  the 
plant  a  vigorous  protest  was  made  by  the  citizens,  one  of  whom  naively 
asked  why  the  lights  were  so  poor  and  so  often  out  if  the  plant  was  as 
good  as  was  claimed  by  some  of  the  city  officials. 

Shortly  before  the  above  contract  was  made  a  member  of  the  Board 
of  Public  Works  wrote  as  follows : 

"Our  lighting  plant  is  about  the  same  as  all  other  municipal  plants,  which  to 
my  mind  is  never  a  great  success  to  the  city,  on  account  of  so  many  contingencies 
arising  in  the  management  of  the  same.  The  manager  is  subjected  at  all  times  to 
change  of  administration  and  political  influences,  which  is  not  always  for  the  best 
of  the  service. 

"This  city  bought  this  plant  something  like  eleven  years  ago,  and  during  these 
elev*n  years  it  has  not  always  given  the  best  of  service.  It  has  not  begun  to  pay 


18  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

for  itself,  and  now  we  are  confronted  with  the  reconstruction  of  more  modern 
machinery  with  the  hope  that  from  now  on  it  will  do  better. 

"I  have  yet  failed  to  see  any  great  result  of  municipal  ownership  of  public 
utilities  for  reasons  above  stated,  viz :  that  you  will  never  be  able  to  get  as  efficient 
and  conservative  managers  as  corporations  or  private  individuals.  When  they 
sustain  a  loss  they  will  have  to  bear  it;  if  the  municipal  plant  sustains  a  loss  it  is 
up  to  the  taxpayers  to  make  it  good." 

The  city  also  owns  a  gas  plant,  of  which  the  Escanaba  Mirror  said : 

"Excessive  rates  and  an  unsatisfactory  lighting  service  being  furnished  to  con- 
sumers of  Escanaba  by  the  municipal  lighting  plant  has  resulted  in  Escanaba 
becoming  the  Mecca  for  representatives  of  gaslight  manufacturing  companies,  and 
a  majority  of  the  business  places  on  Ludington  street  are  now  being  lighted  from 
private  gas  plants  installed  by  the  store  tenants." 


EVA 


;VART,*  MICH.— This  municipal  plant  was  installed  in  1890  at  a  cost 
of  $20,000.  In  1912  the  village  granted  a  franchise  to  a  private  company 
to  furnish  electricity  for  light  and  power.  The  village  clerk  writes : 

"The  real  cause  for  the  failure  of  municipal  operation  was  due  to  the  fact  that 
we  sold  electricity  for  less  than  the  cost  of  production.  Without  making  a  complete 
inventory  I  could  not  find  the  exact  figures  of  our  loss,  but  I  don't  think  it  would 
exceed  five  or  six  thousand  dollars." 

FAYETTEVILLE,  N.  C— The  city  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in  1902 
at  a  cost  of  $30,000.  A  few  years  later  the  generating  plant  was  closed 
down  and  a  contract  for  current  was  made. 

The  municipal  plant  has  since  been  sold,  and  the  town  is  now  being 
lighted  by  a  private  company. 

FiNDLAY,  ILL. — Early  in  1913  the  Village  Board  sold  to  a  private  com- 
pany the  electric  plant  installed  at  a  cost  of  $7,500.  The  village  clerk 
writes : 

"Our  reason  for  selling  the  municipal  plant  was  because  it  was  a  money-losing 
proposition.  I  do  not  believe  a  plant  can  be  operated  successfully  in  a  town  of 
this  size." 

FINDLAY,  OHIO — The  municipal  gas  plant  was  sold  in  1899,  being  in 
debt  at  that  time  for  $60,000.  The  plant  was  originally  purchased  from 
a  private  company  for  $75,000,  in  addition  to  which  $40,000  was  spent 
immediately  after  the  purchase.  The  total  amount  of  debt  amounted  at 
one  time  to  $310,000,  this  being  reduced  from  time  to  time  from  the 
taxes  and  from  the  income  of  the  plant.  In  1899  the  natural  gas  wells 
gave  out,  and  the  city  was  confronted  with  a  situation  where  it  must  sell 
out  or  spend  $150,000  more,  for  which  there  were  no  available  funds, 
in  building  an  artificial  gas  plant.  This  would  have  necessitated  a  great 
advance  in  the  rates.  Rather  than  do  this  the  city  sold  the  plant  for 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  19 

$150,000  to  the  Citizens'  Gas  Light  &  Coke  Company,  which  now  obtains 
gas  from  a  pipe  line  110  miles  long,  and  charges  exceedingly  low  rates. 
When  asked  regarding  the  plant,  the  former  superintendent  said: 

"When  the  city  owned  the  plant  unnecessary  expenditures  were  constantly  being 
made,  while,  in  many  cases,  necessary  improvements  were  ignored.  The  pipe  line, 
some  of  which  was  thirty  years  old  or  more,  was  in  very  bad  shape.  A  large 
amount  would  have  been  necessary  to  put  the  plant  into  shape,  by  the  city.  It 
was  therefore  sold.  The  company  immediately  set  to  work  to  remedy  the  defects 
in  the  old  plant,  so  that  now  practically  all  of  the  pipe  lines  in  the  city  are  new. 
No  city  can  own  and  properly  operate  a  gas  plant." 

On  June  13th,  1913,  a  proposition  to  issue  $57,000  in  bonds  with  which 
to  construct  a  distributing  plant  for  electrical  current  to  light  the  city 
streets  was  voted  down. 

FORSYTH,*  GA. — This  city  has  found  that  it  is  cheaper  to  purchase  cur- 
rent than  to  manufacture  it  in  the  municipal  plant.  A  contract  has  been 
made  with  the  Central  Georgia  Power  Company. 

FORTY  FORT,  PA. — The  municipal  plant  formerly  operated  by  the 
borough  has  recently  been  taken  over  by  the  Luzerne  County  Gas  and 
Electric  Company.  A  citizen  writes : 

"The  plant  had  never  been  operated  at  a  profit,  although  an  ingenious  method, 
of  figuring  on  the  auditor's  report  made  a  plausible  showing." 

FORT  WORTH,*  TEX. — The  municipal  lighting  plant  was  installed  iff 
1891.  In  1911  the  generating  plant  was  shut  down  and  a  contract  for 
current  was  made  with  a  private  company. 

The  following  report  made  by  Mr.  John  F.  Grant,  the  city  light  com- 
missioner, giving  comparative  results  under  municipal  ownership  and 
when  purchasing  current,  shows  the  saving  to  the  taxpayers. 

UNDER  MUNICIPAL  OWNERSHIP. 

Current  used  in  City  Hall,  seven  months  in  1911 $1,149.24 

Holly  Water  Works  Plant,  amount  of  electricity  used  in  1911 1,148.14 

Street  lighting,  first  four  months  of  1911 7,412.40 


Total    $9,709.78 

CURRENT  BOUGHT  FROM  PRIVATE  COMPANY. 

Current  used  in  City  Hall,  seven  months  in  1912 $   796.97 

Amount  of  electricity  used  at  Holly  Water  Works  Plant  in  1912 417.93 

Street  lighting  first  four  months  of  1912 6,695JJo 

Total $7,910.7<> 

The  commissioner  says  in  his  letter  dated  December  19th,  1912: 


20  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

"As  a  general  proposition  I  believe  that  any  city  is  better  off  while  steering  clear 
of  municipal  ownership,  because  it  is  a  political  job,  and  where  politics  enter  into 
these  large  concerns,  it  is  very  hard  to  keep  them  on  a  business  basis.  Our  city  owns 
its  water  works  and  they  are  a  very  great  expense.  I  think  in  general,  it  would  pay 
any  city  to  buy  street  lights  when  they  can  make  a  good  contract  for  current.  From 
all  that  I  can  pick  up  or  find  out  I  believe  that  water  works  and  light  plants  are 
usually  expensive  to  a  city." 

FRANKFORT,  N.  Y. — In  1903  an  electric  plant  was  installed  at  a  cost 
of  $6.50  for  each  inhabitant.  In  1907  the  village  trustees  made  a  five- 
year  contract  with  the  Utica  Gas  and  Electric  Company  because  its  price 
is  less  than  the  mere  operating  cost  of  the  municipal  plant. 

FREDERICKSBURG,  VA. — The  municipal  electric  light  and  water  plant 
installed  in  1902  at  a  cost  of  $18,000  has  been  leased  to  a  private  company. 

The  city  commissioner,  writes  under  date  of  October  9,  1913,  as  follows : 

"Until  recently  the  City  of  Fredericksburg  owned  its  own  water  rights  and 
power  plant,  and  a  contract  was  entered  into  with  the  Fredericksburg  Power  Com- 
pany because  on  account  of  the  extensive  developments  made  by  the  company  they 
were  able  to  use  the  same  water  that  the  city  was  using,  at  an  increased  head, 
which  made  it  to  their  advantage  to  take  over  the  city's  water  rights. 

"In  order  to  secure  these  rights  from  the  city,  they  have  entered  into  a  fifteen- 
year  contract  to  furnish  the  city  with  all  lights  necessary,  at  a  figure  more  than 
one  thousand  dollars  less  than  the  cost  of  operating  the  city  plant  formerly." 

FULDA,  MINN. — A  letter  from  the  mayor  contains  the  following  state- 
ment: 

"Our  plant  was  not  sold  but  given  away  in  1902 ;  but  the  deed  was  not  executed 
until  five  years  later,  as  according  to  contract  the  present  owner  was  to  run  it  for 
five  years  [in  payment]  for  it.  The  reason  for  giving  it  away  was  that  it  ran  about 
$1,000  behind  every  year.  The  original  cost  was  about  $5,000." 

This  original  cost  must  have  been  increased  by  later  additions,  as  in 
May,  1904,  the  superintendent  reported  the  cost  as  $10,000. 

About  three  years  ago  a  number  of  the  business  men  took  over  the 
plant,  and,  by  the  introduction  of  new  methods  and  the  installation  of 
better  machinery,  put  the  plant  on  a  good  financial  basis. 

GALENA,  ILL. — The  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in  1898  at  a  cost 
of  $18,000.  It  was  sold  in  July,  1908,  for  $13,000,  but  this  price  included 
a  25-year  light,  power  and  traction  franchise.  Under  the  new  contract 
the  city  gets  practically  twice  the  amount  of  street  lighting  that  was 
furnished  by  the  municipal  plant  at  only  fifteen  per  cent  greater  cost. 
The  plant  had  not  been  a  success.  One  account  of  it  says : 

"Its  management  was  changed  as  often  as  new  political  cliques  gained  power,  and 
at  times  there  was  no  street  illumination  at  all.  The  commercial  service  was  inferior." 

News  of  the  action  of  the  council  spread  rapidly,  and  a  large  crowd 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  21 

congregated  in  front  of  one  of  the  hotels  to  express  their  delight  at  get- 
ting rid  of  the  plant.  A  brass  band  was  pressed  into  service,  and  speeches 
were  made  by  prominent  citizens. 

GASTONIA,*  N.  C. — The  mayor  writes  in  explanation  of  the  shutting 
down  of  the  generating  plant : 

"We  installed  our  lighting  plant  in  1900  and  generated  our  own  current  until  1906. 
At  that  time  we  found  that  we  had  outgrown  our  generating  plant  and  that  we  could 
contract  for  our  current  cheaper  than  we  could  install  additional  apparatus  and 
generate  the  same." 

GILROY,  CAL. — Two  of  Gilroy's  three  municipal  enterprises  have  been 
turned  over  to  private  ownership. 

When  the  gas  plant  was  leased  in  1908,  after  five  years  of  municipal 
operation,  the  following  resolution  was  passed  unanimously : 

"Whereas,  the  records  of  the  city  show  that  for  more  than  three  years  past  the 
municipal  lighting  plant  has  been  conducted  at  a  large  loss  to  the  city,  and 

"Whereas,  we  are  informed,  and  believe  the  same  to  be  true,  that  in  order  to  equip 
said  municipal  lighting  plant  so  as  to  produce  an  adequate  supply  of  gas  of  a  good 
quality,  and  without  a  loss  to  the  city  for  manufacturing  the  same,  will  require  an 
expenditure  of  money  largely  in  excess  of  any  funds  of  the  city  available  for  such 
purpose,  and  in  excess  of  the  limit  fixed  by  the  charter  of  the  city  for  obtaining  such 
funds  by  taxation;  therefore  be  it 

"Resolved,  That  the  leasing  of  the  gas  department  of  said  municipal  lighting  plant 
for  a  term  of  years,  and  the  discontinuance  of  the  production  of  electricity  is  a  public 
necessity." 

The  city  clerk  wrote  at  the  time  the  lease  was  made : 

"The  weak  features  of  municipal  ownership  and  operation  as  we  have  found  them 
are  as  follows:  There  is  no  provision  made  for  laying  aside  each  year  a  certain 
amount  as  a  sinking  fund  to  renew  the  system  when  it  becomes  deteriorated 
through  age  and  usage;  secondly,  our  city  council  serves  for  a  period  of  two  years, 
when  usually  new  men  take  their  places,  and  very  often  one  set  of  officers  undo  the 
good  accomplished  by  their  predecessors.  There  is  much  more  that  could  be  offered 
on  the  subject,  but  lack  of  time  prohibits  my  going  further  into  the  matter.  Rest 
assured  that  we  have  sifted  this  matter  to  the  very  bottom." 

The  electric  light  plant  built  in  1905  from  the  proceeds  of  $15,000  in 
bonds  was  operated  at  a  loss  only  slightly  less  than  that  of  the  gas  plant. 
It  was  leased  to  a  private  company  in  1911,  at  an  annual  rental  of  10 
per  cent  of  the  gross  receipts. 

The  San  Francisco  Chronicle  gives  the  following  data: 

"During  the  fiscal  year  1909-10  the  receipts  of  the  electric  plant  were  $5,721.87,  and 
the  disbursements  were  $9,667.19,  leaving  an  operating  loss  of  $3,945.32.  This  figure 
does  not  include  any  charges  other  than  the  cost  of  operation  and  maintenance. 

"During  the  first  eight  months  of  the  fiscal  year  1910-11,  when  the  plant  was 
leased,  the  losses  were  still  greater.  In  that  period  the  receipts  were  $3,882.82,  and 
the  disbursements  were  $7,663.56.  If  the  loss  of  $3,780.74,  which  was  sustained 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

during  the  eight  months,  were  projected  throughout  the  year,  it  would  amount  to 
$5,671.08. 

"Taking  the  fiscal  year  1909-10,  as  the  figures  are  complete,  and  adding  the  proper 
charges,  the  entire  losses  sustained  by  the  plant  would  be  as  follows : 

Operating  loss $3,045.32 

Bond  interest  at  5  per  cent 639.45 

Investment  interest  at  6  per  cent 132.30 

Depreciation  at  2%  per  cent 375.00 

Taxes  at  $1.46 109.50 

Salary  of  City  Clerk  1/6 150.00 

Rent  City  Hall 60.00 

Total $5,411.57" 

It  may  be  said  on  the  authority  of  the  most  competent  experts  that  an 
allowance  of  two  and  a  half  per  cent  for  depreciation  is  entirely  inade- 
quate. From  three  to  five  times  that  amount  should  be  allowed. 

GIRARD,  ILL. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant,  which  began  opera- 
tion in  1899,  was  sold  on  December  3,  1912,  to  a  private  company.  The 
committee  appointed  to  investigate  the  plant  submitted  the  following 
report  : 

"To  the  Honorable  Mayor  and  the  City  Council  of  Girard,  111.— 

"We,  your  committee  appointed  to  investigate  the  conditions  pertaining  to  our 
electric  lighting  plant  and  to  hear  propositions  from  anybody  concerning  the  plant, 
beg  to  report : 

"We  find  that  up  to  January  3,  1900,  the  end  of  a  city  fiscal  year,  the  city  paid  out 
$5,649.84  for  the  purchase  of  our  lighting  plant,  equipment  and  four  months'  opera- 
tion ;  that  in  the  next  fiscal  year  the  city  collected  $1,988.69  for  commercial  lighting, 
and  paid  out  $4,137.24  for  the  lighting  plant.  From  the  city  treasurer's  annual  re- 
ports for  the  fiscal  years  ending  1902,  1903  and  1904,  we  find  that  the  collections  for 
commercial  lighting  were  $1,619.55,  $2,162.70  and  $2,251.04  respectively  and  the 
amounts  disbursed  for  said  years  on  account  of  the  city  lighting  plant  were  $3,240.71, 
$3,206.17  and  $3,231.40  respectively.  We  cannot  find  the  books  of  the  city  treasurer 
for  the  fiscal  year  ending  1905.  Incidentally,  we  would  recommend  a  system  and 
place  for  filing  the  old  books  and  records  of  the  city.  Not  until  1905  were  the  finances 
of  the  city  handled  on  the  treasurer's  books  according  to  funds,  therefore  we  were 
compelled  to  pass  several  expensive  years  in  the  history  of  the  plant  in  figuring  what 
it  has  cost  the  city  to  operate  its  plant. 

"We  find  that  from  1905  on,  the  city  spent  all  the  collections  and  revenue  accruing 
from  commercial  lighting  on  the  operation  of  the  plant  and  in  addition  thereto  the 
following  appropriations  from  the  moneys  of  the  city:  1905,  $500;  1906,  $3,121.65; 
1907,  $1,393.15;  1908,  $6,593;  1909,  $1,572.52;  1910,  $1,399.51;  1911,  $1,050;  1912, 
$500. 

"The  interest  on  the  light  bonds  for  seven  years  at  $247.50  per  annum  was  $1,732.50, 
making  a  total  to  the  city  of  $12,839.53  for  seven  years'  operation  of  the  plant.  Thus 
it  appears  that  for  the  last  seven  years  the  city  has  spent  an  average  each  year  of 
$1,834.22  and  in  return  therefor  has  had  its  streets  lighted.  As  near  as  we  could 
ascertain,  the  city  could  buy  the  same  number  of  watts  of  electricity  for  street  light- 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  23 

ing  for  about  $500  per  annum.  We  now  have  27  street  lights  burning  until  midnight 
on  a  sort  of  moonlight  schedule.  The  control  and  management  of  the  plant  is 
vested  in  an  electric  light  committee  who  receive  a  part  of  two  dollars  per  month 
for  this  service,  so  it  may  be  imagined  how  much  time  each  month  this  committee 
can  devote  to  the  plant.  As  a  rule  a  business  of  this  kind  will  not  run  itself  suc- 
cessfully. In  the  buying  of  supplies  this  committee  is  hampered  by  the  lack  of 
available  ready  cash,  so  essential  to  successful  buying.  They  must  lose  cash  dis- 
counts and  quantity  price. 

"The  management  and  operation  is  also  a  prey  to  the  spoils  system  of  politics. 
A  'dry'  mayor  would  be  likely  to  appoint  'dry'  management,  and  a  'wet'  the 
reverse,  but  it  is  creditable  to  the  present  mayor  that  he  has  put  business  ahead  of 
politics.  Most  people  now  concede  that  business  and  politics  do  not  mix  well  and 
yet  we  find  politics  in  place  of  business  brains  in  control  of  the  city  lighting  system. 

"Another  important  feature  almost  entirely  overlooked  is  the  city's  liability  in 
case  of  accident  to  its  employees.  These  are  difficult  to  figure  on  but  the  probability 
of  their  occurrence  is  always  considered  by  those  who  spend  a  lifetime  on  such 
figures.  We  refer  as  evidence  to  the  premium  rates  on  this  kind  of  insurance 
since  the  passage  of  our  new  Illinois  laws  on  this  subject.  Suppose  the  city  treasury 
should  get  hit  for  $5,000  or  $10,000  to  be  added  to  the  annual  cost  of  $1,834.22. 
The  city  has  no  employer's  liability  insurance.  Think  of  the  hazards  of  this  busi- 
ness !  The  committee  is  not  familiar  enough  with  electricity  and  its  accessories  to 
enumerate  more  than  a  few  of  them,  but  we  would  call  to  your  attention  the  fact 
that  our  plant  has  no  lightning  arresters,  though  lightning  may,  at  any  time,  wipe 
out  hundreds  of  dollars  worth  of  machinery.  Explosions  occur.  A  pole  may  fall 
on  somebody  or  on  a  horse.  A  live  wire  may  get  within  touching  distance  of  some 
of  our  people.  All  of  these  hazards  are  daily  risked  without  any  profit,  whereas  in 
a  business  such  as  this,  the  profits  should  be  large  enough  to  cover  the  hazards. 

"Then  there  is  the  possibility  of  the  value  of  our  investment  shrinking  because 
the  plant  may  become  obsolete.  Now  small  units  for  the  generation  of  electric  cur- 
rent are  being  abandoned  for  the  larger  units  with  their  greatly  decreased  cost  in 
the  production  of  current.  It  was  this  fact  that  brought  you  to  appoint  this  com- 
mittee. How  fast  will  these  changes  and  new  inventions  come?  Even  now  your 
committee  has  been  unable  to  find  anybody  or  any  corporation  who  will  lease  our 
plant  and  agree  to  manufacture  in  it  all  the  current  they  may  sell,  because  they 
claim  that  our  plant  is  bound  to  be  operated  at  a  loss,  and  that  they  can  buy  current 
from  a  large  unit  plant  much  cheaper  than  this  plant  can  produce  it.  In  the  name 
of  reason,  how  can  the  city  afford,  with  its  political  management  of  business,  to 
continue  to  operate  a  plant  that  nobody  else  can  make  pay?  A  few  words  about  the 
service.  We  have  street  lighting  only  until  midnight,  and  everybody  knows  that 
crime  flourishes  best  from  midnight  to  daybreak  and  that  light  is  one  of  the  best 
preventatives  of  crime.  We  have  now  no  day  current.  On  account  of  lack  of  funds 
we  can  make  no  extensions,  consequently  we  have  citizens  and  taxpayers  wishing 
to  buy  current,  but  unable  to  get  it,  which  does  not  seem  just,  inasmuch  as  our 
present  system  is  maintained  by  some  of  everybody's  tax  money." 

The  committee  was  adverse  to  leasing  the  plant,  and  pronounced 
strongly  in  favor  of  selling  to  a  private  company  which  would  guarantee 
"efficient  service,  day  current,  prompt  response  to  trouble  calls,  etc."  It 
was  anxious  that  the  city  should  free  itself  from  the  incubus  once  and 
for  all,  and  be  rid  of  "that  bonded  indebtedness  which  for  years  has  held 
the  city  back  on  anything  and  everything."  The  report  continues : 


24  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

"A  few  years  ago  our  city  had  numerous  fires  and  needed  fire  protection,  but  there 
was  the  bonded  debt.  Luckily  the  assessed  valuation  of  property  had  increased 
enough  so  that  the  city  could  squeeze  by  on  the  purchase  of  a  fire  engine." 

GLADSTONE,*  MICH. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant,  installed  in 
1897  at  a  cost  of  $52,000,  has  been  purchasing  power  from  a  private 
company  since  1910. 

GOLDSBORO,  N.  C— In  the  Electrical  World  of  May  18,  1912,  it  was 
stated  that  the  municipal  electric  light  plant  has  been  purchased  by  the 
Carolina  Power  Company  of  Raleigh  for  $125,000,  "which  includes  a 
60-year  franchise  for  lighting  the  city  and  for  furnishing  electricity  for 
lamps  and  commercial  purposes." 

The  editor  of  the  Goldsboro  Headlight  writes  as  follows : 

"The  local  lighting  plant  was  found  to  be  inadequate  to  present  demands,  re- 
quiring an  additional  outlay  of  $30,000,  which  the  city  did  not  have  to  expend.  The 
efficiency  of  its  management  was  handicapped  by  politics,  and  lack  of  funds  to  make 
improvements. 

"The  consumers  had  to  pay  more  for  light  than  under  private  management. 
Altogether  the  service  was  unsatisfactory." 

GOODLAND,  IND. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant,  which  began 
operation  in  1894,  was  sold  to  a  private  company  on  November  1,  1912. 
The  president  of  the  town  board  writes : 

"The  lights  were  on  only  from  dusk  until  11  p.  m.  and,  during  the  winter,  two 
hours  of  a  morning.  Some  of  the  business  houses  preferred  their  own  plants,  such 
as  carbide  or  gasoline.  This  cut  off  our  revenue  and  we  had  to  charge  high  for 
street  lights  in  order  to  run  the  plant. 

"We  sold  to  the  Northern  Utilities  Company  and  will  now  get  twenty-four  hour 
service  without  any  more  cost  than  before.  Our  plant  was  about  worn  out,  and  I 
deem  it  a  wise  plan  to  dispose  of  it  and  get  better  service." 

GRACEVILLE,  MINN. — The  president  of  the  village  council  writes  as 
follows  under  date  of  September  27,  1913 : 

"This  village  has  been  operating  its  lighting  plant  during  the  past  seventeen  years 
and  while  I  have  not  the  figures  at  hand  it  is  safe  to  assume  that  the  plant  has  run 
$2,000  a  year  behind  during  this  entire  period.  Hence,  when  the  Otter  Tail  Co. 
made  an  offer  for  the  ,plant  and  agreed  to  furnish  lights  for  about  25  per  cent, 
less  than  our  people  had  been  paying,  with  the  additional  inducement  of  getting  a, 
24-hour  service,  they  accepted  the  proposition  at  a  special  election  by  a  vote  of 
128  in  favor  and  3  against. 

"In  a  village  of  1,000  people  operating  under  the  somewhat  primitive  form  of 
local  government  as  provided  by  the  laws  of  this  state  with  the  term  of  office  of 
municipal  officials  running  but  one  year,  there  is  necessarily  no  continuity  of 
business  policy  and  hence  these  plants  as  a  rule  are  not  managed  as  economically 
nor  as  efficiently  as  the  private  corporation  operates  them. 

"In  making  this  sale  our  people  were  guided  in  a  large  measure  by  the  experience 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  25 

of   other  towns  in  this  part  of  Minnesota  which  are  now   served  by  the  Otter 
Tail  Co." 

GRAND  LEDGE,  MICH. — In  1895  this  city  installed  a  water  and  electric 
plant  at  a  cost  of  $24,000.  In  1908,  by  a  vote  of  327  to  96,  the  electric 
plant  was  sold  to  a  company.  At  the  time  of  the  sale  the  mayor  wrote: 

"Reasons  for  change  are  cheaper  operation,  extra  service  and  better  service." 

GRAVESEND,  N.  Y. — The  municipality  constructed  an  electric  light  plant 
at  a  cost  of  approximately  $120,000.  It  was,  however,  never  put  into 
operation,  and  was  sold  for  $31,100  after  the  annexation  of  Gravesend  to 
Brooklyn. 

GRIFFIN,*  GA. — The  municipal  light,  water  and  sewerage  plant,  installed 
in  1895,  has  begun  to  purchase  power  from  a  private  company. 

HAMILTON,*  OHIO — This  city  shows  better  than  any  other  what  may 
be  expected  of  municipal  ownership  when  carried  out  fully,  for  it  is  the 
only  city  in  the  United  States  with  a  population  exceeding  25,000  which 
has  built  and  operated  its  own  water,  gas  and  electric  plants.  The  gas 
plant,  installed  in  1890  at  a  cost  of  $150,000  (subsequently  increased  to 
$221,383),  was  closed  down  in  1906 — a  total  wreck,  bonds  to  the  amount 
of  $110,000  being  still  unpaid  at  that  time.  For  some  time  before  this  it 
had  been  purchasing  most  of  its  gas  from  a  competing  company.  Since 
1906  the  city  has  bought  all  its  gas. 

On  March  9,  1906,  a  report  on  the  financial  condition  of  these  plants 
was  filed  with  the  state  auditor  by  Mr.  L.  B.  Cooke,  special  examiner  of 
the  state  bureau  of  inspection  and  supervision  of  public  offices.  In  this 
he  shows  that,  considering  operating  expenses  only,  the  gas  and  electric 
light  works  incurred  losses  for  the  three  years  ending  December  31, 1905, 
of  $16,689  and  $4,426  respectively,  while  the  waterworks  show  a  profit  on 
paper  of  $12,797.  When  a  proper  allowance  is  made  for  depreciation, 
interest,  insurance  and  lost  taxes,  it  appears  that  the  aggregate  loss  of 
these  three  plants  for  the  three  years  exceeds  $230,000.  The  following 
extracts  from  Mr.  Cooke's  reports  show  the  situation  in  detail: 

"The  administration  of  the  board  of  public  service,  extending  over  the  period 
stated  heretofore,  is  marked  with  evidence  of  mismanagement,  extravagance  and 
unbusiness-like  methods  in  the  operation  of  public  properties  placed  in  their  charge. 

"The  evident  lack  of  organization  and  concentration  of  superintendence  and 
labor  and  the  employment  of  inexperienced  men  to  superintend  important  work, 
where  both  mechanical  and  electrical  skill  were  necessary  in  order  to  understand 
the  needs  of  the  several  institutions  for  an  economical  operation  and  maintenance, 
existed  in  this  department.  In  the  electrical  department  the  enormous  waste  of 
energy,  owing  to  faulty  construction,  has  raised  the  cost  of  production  of  current 


26  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

to  an  abnormal  figure.  The  operating  of  the  gas  works  has  been  far  from  econom- 
ical, and  it  is  an  established  fact  that  the  cost  of  production  of  light  and  power 
from  both  utilities  have  at  times  exceeded  the  schedule  rate  charged  for  the  service. 
Apparently  no  attempt  has  ever  been  made  on  the  part  of  the  board  to  place  these 
properties  on  a  paying  basis,  notwithstanding  the  existence  of  competition  and 
urgent  necessity. 

"The  board  of  public  service  contracted  for  several  thousand  tons  of  coal  an- 
nually. This  coal  was  apparently  delivered  and  paid  for  on  weights  furnished  by 
contractors,  unsupported  by  evidence  of  mine  or  railroad  weight.  Computation  of 
coal  delivered  and  consumed  at  the  gas  works  for  a  given  time  shows  that  either 
the  city  has  paid  for  a  large  amount  of  coal  not  delivered,  or  that  a  considerable 
amount  of  product  of  this  plant  has  been  disposed  of  without  return  of  revenue  into 
its  coffers.  No  periodical  statement  of  cost  of  operation  of  the  utilities  had  been 
made  since  January  1st,  1905,  and  the  working  of  the  plants  appears  to  have  been 
left  to  employes  without  the  rendering  of  an  account  of  performance. 

"The  manner  of  handling  sales  of  coke,  tar  and  other  residue  at  the  gas  works 
was  primitive  in  the  extreme.  The  money  for  such  sales  was  paid  in  at  the  works 
to  the  most  convenient  employe,  and  it  is  in  evidence  that  a  heavy  leakage  of  public 
money  has  occurred  through  this  irregular  manner  of  transacting  coke  sales.  A 
regular  sales-book  was  kept  at  the  gas  works  with  consecutively  numbered  ticket 
and  stub  with  number  printed  thereon.  The  examiner  found  hundreds  of  duplicate 
tickets  issued  at  the  gas  works  with  number  written  in  with  pencil,  but  the  original 
tickets  were  nowhere  in  evidence.  This  practice  left  a  large  loop-hole  for  dishon- 
esty. The  sales-book  stubs,  covering  a  period  from  Sept.  14th,  1905,  to  Dec.  24th, 
1905,  are  missing  and  cannot  be  located. 

"The  board  has  allowed  the  accumulation  of  an  extraordinarily  large  delin- 
quent list  of  patrons  of  the  public  service.  On  Dec.  31st,  1905,  there  was  more  than 
thirty-five  thousand  dollars  of  uncollected  accounts  on  the  books  of  the  board ;  many 
of  these  accounts  had  been  running  for  some  years.  Officials,  ex-officials,  promi- 
nent citizens  and  others,  were  enjoying  free  service;  while  these  accounts  were 
duly  charged  on  the  books,  apparently  no  effort  had  been  made  toward  their  col- 
lection or  adjustment.  Several  individual  accounts  ranged  from  one  hundred  to 
eleven  hundred  dollars. 

"The  board  has  permitted  private  employes  to  dispose  of  coal  and  the  products 
of  the  utilities.  This  procedure  is  against  good  policy,  if  not  a  violation  of  the 
statutes.  Instances  were  found  where  public  property  had  been  disposed  of  and  no 
charge  made  against  the  employe ;  other  cases  where  charges  had  been  made  in  the 
regular  manner,  but  no  payment  had  ever  been  made  on  the  accounts.  In  view  of 
the  fact  that  the  record  of  sales  and  disposal  of  fuel  for  a  considerable  period  are 
now  missing,  the  full  extent  of  the  loss  will  probably  never  be  known." 

After  the  filing  of  this  report  the  board  of  public  service  procured 
the  services  of  an  expert,  Mr.  Wm.  E.  Maher,  to  examine  the  plant.  In 
his  report  Mr.  Maher  says: 

"I  beg  to  submit  herewith  the  result  of  my  investigation  of  the  municipal  gas 
works  property  of  the  City  of  Hamilton  and  its  operation,  and  my  suggestions  are 
that  the  plant  be  shut  down  at  once,  as  you  are  simply  carbonizing  22,000  pounds 
of  coal  to  make  coke  which  you  are  selling  at  about  half  its  commercial  value.  The 
general  condition  of  your  coal  gas  plant  is  in  such  bad  repair  that  you  are  simply 
burning  up  what  little  gas  you  do  make.  The  retorts  are  so  congested  with  carbon 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  27 

that  it  is  impossible  to  get  a  proper  charge  of  coal  in,  and  inasmuch  as  the  retorts 
are  in  such  bad  condition,  if  you  were  to  remove  the  carbon  you  would  simply  have 
no  retort. 

"On  account  of  your  taking  gas  from  the  Otto  Coke  people,  their  pipe  being 
connected  to  your  works  meter,  I  was  obliged  to  determine  the  make,  if  any,  by 
placing  a  hundred  light  meter  on  the  outlet  of  your  coal  gas  plant  and  found  that 
there  was  but  seven  hundred  feet  per  hour  coming  through.  It  did,  however,  get 
up  once  to  a  thousand  feet,  but  this  did  not  go  into  your  holder  as  the  holder  pres- 
sure would  not  permit  without  speeding  up  the  engine  to  overcome  the  holder 
pressure.  In  doing  this  I  found  that  the  leakage  was  so  bad  in  the  retorts  and 
around  about  the  stack  generally  that  I  would  draw  air  through  to  such  an  extent 
that  it  would  not  burn.  Hence  I  am  satisfied  that  you  have  been  simply  churning 
this  gas  back  and  forward  and  burning  it  up. 

"My  reason  for  recommending  that  you  discontinue  the  use  of  this  plant  as 
soon  as  possible  is  that  you  are  losing  in  round  numbers  daily  sixty-five  dollars. 
I  arrived  at  this  conclusion  by  taking  your  coal,  purification  and  labor  together, 
and  it  shows  this  amount." 

The  Hamilton  correspondent  of  the  Cincinnati  Post,  who  was  evidently 
a  firm  believer  in  municipal  ownership,  stated  that  "the  failure  of  the  city 
plant  is  due  to  the  fact  that  it  was  made  a  refuge  for  heelers  who  were 
too  tired  to  work,"  and  adds  that  "the  same  road  that  was  traveled  by  the 
gas  plant  is  now  being  traveled  by  the  electric  light  plant."  He  might 
well  have  included  the  waterworks  also,  for  the  board  of  public  service 
asked  for  $100,000  to  rehabilitate  it,  as  well  as  for  $125,000  for  the 
reconstruction  of  the  lighting  plants. 

Whatever  effect  politics  may  have  had  upon  the  gas  plant  its  failure 
was  due  quite  as  much  to  the  total  ignoring  by  those  having  it  in  charge 
of  the  relation  between  price  and  cost.  To  satisfy  the  public  demand  for 
cheap  gas  they  made  two  sweeping  reductions  in  price  without  regard  to- 
cost  and  without  reducing  cost  by  conservation  of  by-products.  By  thus 
selling  gas  at  less  than  cost  the  city  nearly  put  the  private  company  out  of 
business.  The  latter,  however,  by  availing  itself  of  modern  processes 
succeeded  not  only  in  meeting  the  competition  but  in  giving  better  service 
than  was  furnished  by  the  city.  It  should  be  noted,  however,  that  while 
their  prices  were  identical,  the  city  was  selling  at  a  loss,  while  the  com- 
pany was  making  a  profit. 

All  that  can  be  said  for  the  city  plant  is  that  it  may  have  slightly 
anticipated  the  reduction  in  price  that  has  generally  resulted  from  the  in- 
troduction of  new  methods;  but  to  accomplish  this  it  laid  upon  the  tax- 
payers a  burden  greatly  in  excess  of  any  saving  in  the  price  of  gas,  the 
tax  rate  having  risen  until  it  reached  $3,40  in  1907,  not  including  special 
assessments. 

HAMPSHIRE,  ILL. — In  1893  the  village  installed  dynamos  and  a  dis- 


28  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

tributing  system  at  a  cost  of  $5,000.  This  was  sold  in  1908  for  $3,600. 
In  the  ordinance  providing  for  the  sale  it  was  set  forth  that  the  plant  "had 
become  unprofitable  to  and  a  burden  upon  said  village." 

HAKRISVILLE,  W.  VA. — In  1908  the  mayor  wrote : 

"Some  eight  years  ago  this  little  city  purchased  a  [natural]  gas  plant  at  a  cost 
of  some  $10,000.  The  revenue  from  the  plant  paid  for  it  and  left  a  surplus.  Two 
years  ago  we  leased  the  plant  to  a  private  corporation  at  a  generous  rental." 

So  far  as  we  know  this  is  the  only  lighting  plant  transferred  to  private 
parties  while  being  operated  at  a  profit,  as  this  one  apparently  was.  It 
is  noteworthy,  however,  that  the  people  evidently  believed  that  they 
could  get  better  results  from  the  plant  if  it  were  under  private  manage- 
ment— or  they  would  not  have  leased  it. 

HART,  MICH. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant,  installed  in  1896, 
was  recently  sold  to  a  private  company. 

The  city  clerk  ascribes  the  failure  of  municipal  operation  to  "the  in- 
crease of  commercial  lighting,  which  necessitated  the  carrying  of  a  peak 
load,  thus  enhancing  the  cost  of  production  and  causing  the  plant  to  be- 
come greatly  deteriorated." 

HARVARD,  ILL. — The  electric  light  plant,  installed  in  1895,  was  sold  in 
1907  to  a  private  company  for  $1,425  on  a  forty-year  franchise.  A  letter 
from  a  prominent  citizen  gives  the  following  explanation  of  this  action: 

"The  reason  for  selling  was  that  the  plant  had  deteriorated.  The  service  had 
been  very  bad  and  the  people  were  not  disposed  to  put  money  into  a  new  outfit 
Recent  administrations  let  the  plant  run  down  and  the  Joyce  &  Condon  offer  seemed 
to  be  a  chance  for  relief,  and  it  was  taken." 

It  is  estimated  that  under  municipal  management  the  cost  of  street 
arcs  exceeded  $150  a  year  apiece. 

HEMPSTEAD,  N.  Y. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant  was  sold  to  a 
private  company  about  seven  years  ago. 

HICKMAN,  KY. — The  electric  light  and  water  plant,  installed  by  the 
city  at  a  cost  of  $30,000,  was  leased  in  1906  to  the  Hickman  Ice  and 
Coal  Co.,  for  a  term  of  twenty  years.  The  mayor  assigned  as  the  reason 
that  "the  plant  was  not  self-sustaining." 

HIGH  POINT,  N.  C— In  1892  this  city  installed  an  electric  light  plant 
at  a  cost  of  $20,000.  It  was  sold  to  the  North  Carolina  Public  Service 
Company  ten  years  later.  The  mayor  states  that  the  service  is  greatly 
improved  and  the  rates  are  considerably  lower. 

HILLSBORO,  ORE. — Municipal  operation  of  the  electric  light  and  water 
plant  at  Hillsboro  began  in  1899  and  covered  a  period  of  ten  years. 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  29 

The  editor  of  the  Hillsboro  Independent  writes : 

"All  facts  tend  to  indicate  that  failure  was  owing  to  lack  of  capable  management 
such  as  would  be  given  by  a  private  corporation. 

"The  plant  was  operated  for  ten  years  under  private  ownership  and  paid  a  sub- 
stantial return  upon  investment.  At  the  end  of  that  time  the  city  exercised  a  pur- 
chase option  and  secured  possession,  bonds  of  $24,000  being  issued.  At  the  end  of 
ten  years  of  municipal  operation  indebtedness  of  the  water  and  light  department, 
including  these  bonds,  approximated  $50,000.  The  plant  was  then  sold  to  a  private 
corporation  for  $15,000,  and  it  appears  that  with  the  transfer  the  property  once 
more  became  valuable  and  is  paying  handsomely.  This  may  be  judged  from  the 
fact  that  the  present  owners  have  practically  rebuilt  the  electrical  equipment,  and  at 
present  are  expending  $150,000  in  installing  a  gravity  water  system. 

"Conditions  affecting  the  plant  have  changed  during  the  twenty  years  under  con- 
sideration to  the  extent  that  the  population  has  about  doubled. 

"Hillsboro,  being  a  small  place,  its  municipal  officers  during  the  period  of  city 
ownership  served  without  salary,  and  there  was  a  change  of  administration  yearly. 
Operation  of  the  plant  was  practically  in  charge  of  salaried  superintendents,  some 
of  whom  were  capable  and  others  not;  but  the  appointing  officers,  not  being  prac- 
tical men,  were  usually  unable  to  judge,  and  I  am  informed  that,  as  is  usually  the 
case,  favoritism  and  politics  figured  to  a  large  extent  in  appointments. 

"it  also  appears  that  while  published  rates  were  none  too  large  to  meet  expenses, 
at  different  times  the  council  yielded  to  representations  of  citizens  that,  with  city 
operation,  taxpayers  should  have  cheap  light  and  water  and  further  reduced  rates; 
the  worst  feature  being  the  fixing  of  a  flat  rate  for  residences,  which  resulted  in 
great  extravagance  in  use  of  both  light  and  water,  and  consequent  necessity  for 
additions  to  the  plant. 

"This  policy  continued  until  it  was  found  that  the  city  had  outgrown  the  capacity 
of  the  plant,  which  was  practically  worn  out  and  useless.  No  sinking  fund  from 
which  to  replace  machinery  had  been  maintained  during  municipal  ownership,  and 
during  periods  when  it  had  been  run  without  a  deficit,  receipts  mere.ly  equaled 
operating  expenses.  In  addition  the  bonded  indebtedness  had  reached  its  legal  limit, 
and  nothing  remained  but  to  sell  at  the  best  possible  price.  This  was  done,  as  above 
stated,  and  the  city  now  has  continuous  electrical  service  equal  to  any  of  the  large 
cities,  and,  upon  the  completion  of  the  water  system  now  building,  will  have  an 
abundance  of  pure  water.  And  this  is  being  done  at  a  profit. 

"We  believe  this  record  justifies  the  conclusion  that  responsibility  rests  entirely 
upon  lack  of  proper  management;  for  all  that  private  capital  is  now  doing  could 
have  been  done  by  the  city  riself. 

"However,  taking  conditions  as  they  are  usually  found  in  these  small  cities,  the 
result  is  only  what  might  be  expected.  The  official  serving  without  pay  often  be- 
grudges the  time  given  to  city  affairs,  and  when,  as  in  the  case  of  electrical  equip- 
ment, he  is  ignorant  of  practical  details,  he  seldom  interferes.  The  superintendent 
of  a  small  plant  is  often  not  fully  capable,  and  being  utterly  without  competent 
supervision,  extravagance  in  operation  results.  Add  to  that  a  shortsighted  policy  of 
conceding  rates  below  what  is  necessary  for  working  expenses  and  maintenance,  and 
an  end  such  as  came  to  Hillsboro  is  inevitable." 

HONEY  GROVE,  TEX. — Ernest  Bradford  Smith,  in  the  August,  1907, 
issue  of  Government,  states  that  Honey  Grove  abandoned  its  municipal 


30  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

electric  light  plant  prior  to  1903.    No  information  can  be  obtained  from 
the  city  officials.    The  town  is  now  lighted  by  a  private  company. 

HUDSON,  Wis.— An  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in  1888,  but  ac- 
cording to  the  mayor  has  never  been  operated  by  the  city,  having  been 
leased  successively  to  various  parties.  The  city  also  contracts  for  the 
pumping  in  the  waterworks  which  it  owns. 

A  citizen  writes  as  follows : 

"The  city  did  not  lose  to  any  great  extent  by  operating  its  own  plant,  as  the  city 
soon  figured  out  that  they  could  contract  for  its  street  lighting  and  pumping  much 
cheaper  and  get  better  service.  The  sentiment  here  is  not  in  favor  of  municipal 
ownership." 

HUNTINGDON,  TENN.— The  electric  light  plant  installed  in  1899,  at  a 
cost  of  $25,000,  was  leased  about  six  years  later. 

HUNTSVILLE,  Mo. — About  three  years  ago  the  city  decided  to  try  muni- 
cipal ownership  and  forced  the  Huntsville  Light  and  Power  Company 
to  sell  its  plant  to  the  municipality.  In  these  three  years  Huntsville  has 
learned  its  lesson.  On  July  1,  1913,  the  plant  was  turned  over  to  a  private 
Downer. 

ITASKA,  TEX. — The  following  letter  from  a  former  mayor  of  Itaska 
is  quoted  from  Francisco's  "Business  of  Municipalities  and  Private  Cor- 
porations Compared." 

"Our  city  bored  an  artesian  well  and  was  fortunate  in  securing  a  flow  of  water 
of  very  fine  quality  and  in  a  quantity  about  200  gallons  per  minute.  In  connection 
with  this  it  was  decided  to  build  an  electric  plant.  I  investigated  the  cost  and 
probable  income  of  an  electric  plant  and  found  it  a  doubtful  proposition  and  recom- 
mended that  we  avoid  it,  but  the  aldermen  believed  it  would  pay  in  connection  with 
the  water  works  and  the  work  was  begun. 

"The  pump  was  installed  first  and  was  operated  about  one  month  before  the 
electric  plant  was  ready,  hence  we  know  how  much  it  cost  to  operate  the  pump. 
When  the  electric  machinery  was  put  in  operation  our  losses  began.  We  operated 
it  a  little  more  than  four  months  and  found  that  it  was  taking  all  our  income  from 
both  the  waterworks  and  electric  plant  to  pay  running  expenses  of  the  plant.  We 
did  not  want  to  shut  down  as  we  knew  it  would  be  a  dead  loss,  but  we  were  forced 
to  do  something,  hence  we  hit  upon  the  idea  of  selling  the  electric  part  of  the  plant. 
It  was  turned  over  to  me  to  sell  without  any  reservations  as  to  what  I  should  get. 
I  sold  the  electric  part,  but  not  any  part  of  the  waterworks.  We  lost  money  in 
trying  to  operate  the  plant  and  did  not  get  all  our  money  back  in  the  sale.  We 
operated  the  plant  three  days  less  than  six  months  and  lost  about  $100  per  month. 

"If  you  stop  to  think  about  it,  a  city  cannot  work,  but  must  hire  all  her  help. 
The  hired  man  docs  not  have  the  coal  bill  to  pay  nor  does  he  care  whether  houses 
are  wired  or  not.  He  is  not  much  interested  in  the  receipts  and  does  not  hustle 
business,  hence  the  expenses  run  up  while  the  receipts  are  neglected.  Public  money 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  31 

does  not  hold  out  like  private  money.  I  know  it  ought  to,  but  I  am  now  serving 
in  my  eleventh  year  as  mayor  and  I  know  whereof  I  speak. 

"When  we  come  to  figure  these  things  it  is  not  safe  to  figure  on  what  ought  to 
be  done,  but  we  should  face  facts  and  recognize  the  facts  as  they  really  are  and  not 
as  they  should  be  but  are  not. 

"An  electric  plant  has  to  have  close  personal  attention  and  the  man  who  super- 
intends it  ought  to  have  a  very  serious  interest  in  the  expense  account  and  in  the 
receipts  and  this  interest  should  be  such  as  would  affect  his  own  pocket. 

"You  ask  if  I  would  advise  middle  size  cities  to  build  electric  plants.  Now  in 
answer  to  this  particular  question  I  must  say  I  would  not." 

IUKA.  Miss. — An  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in  1900  at  a  cost  of 
$7,000.  In  December,  1906,  it  was  leased  because  of  the  "difficulty  in 
keeping  a  competent  electrician." 

A  letter  from  the  mayor  contains  the  following  information : 
"The  town  still  owns  its  plant,  but  has  leased  it  to  a  private  party  for  five  years. 
It  has  been  an  expense  to  the  town,  has  not  paid  anything,  and  is  not  likely  to  do  so." 

JEWETT  CITY,*  CONN. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant,  installed 
in  Jewett  City  in  1902,  was  operated  until  1910,  when  the  generating 
plant  was  shut  down  and  a  contract  for  current  was  made  with  a  private 
company. 

The  story  is  told  in  an  editorial  in  the  Jewett  City  Press: 

"No  boroughite  who  is  cognizant  of  the  facts  would  wish  to  see  repeated  the  ex- 
perience of  the  days  when  Jewett  City  was  the  proud  and  unhappy  owner  and  oper- 
ator of  an  electric  light  plant.  To  some  extent  the  lighting  of  the  borough  is  still 
borough  business;  but  it  is  borough  business  without  the  exclamatory  blue  streaks 
which  used  to  disfigure  it.  In  the  days  of  municipal  ownership  'we  looked  for  light, 
but  behold  darkness ;'  and  for  profit,  but  behold  losses. 

"The  conditions  here  were  unfavorable  from  start  to  finish.  The  machinery  never 
sufficed  for  the  load  it  was  made  to  carry;  part  of  the  time  it  was  unspeakably  in- 
adequate; so  that  there  was  nothing  in  it  to  encourage  efficient  service.  The 
operator  who  undertook  to  make  good  was  at  his  wit's  end  all  the  time.  The  machin- 
ery might  break  down  at  any  moment.  To  everybody  concerned  the  lighting  of  the 
borough  was  nerve-racking  business,  when  the  borough  generated  its  own  electricity 
— all  due  to  unsatisfactory  machinery. 

"Not  only  did  the  borough  have  inadequate  machinery  to  work  with  from  the 
start,  it  was  hampered  by  limitations  which  beset  most  medium-sized  communities 
whose  capital  is  not  above  the  average.  It  had  to  economize,  and  few  know  how  to 
economize  wisely  and  profitably.  Economy  is  a  study  which  it  takes  most  of  us 
years  to  master.  We  save  at  the  bung  and  waste  at  the  spigot. 

"So  much  for  Jewett  City's  experience  with  running  a  municipal  machine  shop." 

Underestimate  of  equipment  in  order  to  attract  voters  by  the  low  prices 
promised  is  only  too  common,  and  is  assisted  by  a  certain  class  of  elec- 
trical engineers  and  supply  houses,  who  deceive  their  customers  in  order 
to  make  sales.  But  in  the  end  the  taxpayers  pay  heavily  for  such  inade- 
quate installations. 


32  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

JOLIET,  ILL. — This  city  was  one  of  the  first  to  engage  in  municipal 
lighting.  A  gas  plant  was  installed  in  1857,  bonds  to  the  amount  of 
$30,000  being  issued.  It  proved  a  financial  failure,  and  after  18  months 
the  city  was  glad  to  turn  the  plant  over  to  a  company,  which  agreed  to 
assume  the  bonds  in  exchange  for  a  25-year  franchise. 

JONESBORO,  IND. — Of  the  electric  plant,  installed  in  1902  at  a  cost  of 
$32,000,  the  mayor  wrote  in  1906 : 
"The  entire  plant  has  been  turned  over  to  parties  that  had  the  bonds.'* 

KANSAS,  ILL. — The  mayor  attributes  the  failure  of  the  municipal  elec- 
tric light  plant,  recently  sold,  to  the  annual  change  of  board  members  and 
employees.  To  use  his  own  words:  "The  sentiment  was  to  sell,  and  I 
sold."  The  Mattoon  Heat,  Light  &  Power  Company  is  now  operating 
the  plant  to  the  general  satisfaction  of  the  community. 

KASOTA,*  MINN. — The  town  of  Kasota,  which  was  formerly  supplied 
with  electricity  by  the  municipal  electric  plant  at  St.  Peter,  is  now  served 
by  the  Consumers'  Power  Co.  Owing  to  the  crippled  condition  of  the 
municipal  plant  and  also  to  the  small  boiler  capacity,  the  Consumers' 
Power  Co.  will  continue  to  serve  Kasota  indefinitely. — Electrical  World, 
Jan.  18,  1913. 

KENT,  WASH. — The  electric  plant  was  purchased  from  a  private  com- 
pany in  1892  for  $4,250,  and  was  sold  in  1902  for  $2,550.  The  mayor 
assigns  as  the  reason  for  selling:  "Could  not  make  it  pay." 

KINMUNDY,  ILL. — To  the  great  relief  of  the  citizens  the  municipal 
lighting  plant  was  leased  to  Mr.  J.  C.  Lee  about  1910. 
The  mayor  writes  as  follows : 

"Our  experience  in  municipal  ownership  of  an  electric  light  plant  was  rather 
against  such  ownership.  It  has  cost  the  town  considerable  losses  in  the  past  years. 
The  main  trouble  was  that  every  spring  a  new  election  of  aldermen  changed  the 
electric  light  committee,  where  men  were  constantly  being  placed  who  had  not  the 
slightest  knowledge  of  the  business.  Of  course  it  had  to  run  haphazard,  and  at  a 
constant  loss." 

LA  GRANGE,  ILL. — The  president  of  the  village  wrote  in  1908  as  fol- 
lows: 

'The  water  and  light  plant  in  this  village  was  erected  by  a  private  corporation 
under  a  thirty  year  franchise.  At  the  end  of  the  first  ten  year  period  the  village 
exercised  the  privilege  which  it  had  under  the  franchise,  and  bought  the  entire 
plant.  The  original  cost  is  not  known;  we  paid  (or  agreed  to  pay)  the  sum  of 
$160,000  for  it.  Municipal  control  and  ownership  was  not  successful,  and  after  a 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  33 

few  years  it  was  sold  to  a  branch  of  the  Edison  Company,  the  consideration  being 
that  the  purchaser  assume  all  obligations  standing  against  the  plant  and  put  it  in 
good  order.  Nothing  had  been  paid  on  the  principal  by  the  village. 

"The  cost  to  the  village  for  incandescent  street  lights  under  the  original  franchise 
M  -A  s  ten  dollars  a  year ;  under  municipal  adminstration  no  one  can  tell,  as  the  plant 
ran  down  so  greatly  that  the  new  purchaser  has  paid  over  $168,000  so  far  to  put  it 
in  good  order  and  is  not  through  yet.  Contract  price  at  present  again  ten  dollars  a 
year. 

•Reasons  for  selling — the  village  could  not  raise  the  money  necessary  to  re- 
habilitate the  plant.  Under  our  law  we  could  not  pledge  the  corporate  credit,  but 
only  the  plant  itself;  the  prospect  that  the  village  could  manage  it  successfully  was 
not  attractive  to  capital." 

The  village  purchased  the  plant  about  1901,  and  sold  it  in  1905.  As 
it  was  said  that  it  would  cost  $50,000  to  $60,000  to  put  the  plant  in  good 
order,  and  as  no  provision  for  this  had  been  made  by  a  depreciation  ac- 
count, the  trustees  voted  5  to  1  to  sell.  In  advising  this  action  the  super- 
intendent of  the  plant  wrote  to  the  board  of  trustees : 

"Respecting  the  rates  for  light,  both  for  public  use  (street  lighting  purposes 
and  other  municipal  purposes)  and  for  domestic  consumption,  I  beg  to  say  that  the 
rates,  as  set  forth  in  the  proposed  ordinance  and  agreement,  are  the  same  in  price 
which  we  have  now,  but  under  which  provisions  both  the  village  and  the  consumers 
will  derive  more  current  and  service  for  the  same  money  as  heretofore  paid.  I 
recommend  the  passage  of  this  ordinance  and  the  signing  of  the  contracts  and  the 
adoption  of  said  rates.  The  present  condition  of  the  plant  is  such  that  I  cannot 
conceive  how  it  can  be  operated  longer  by  the  village  without  the  expenditure  of 
large  sums  of  money,  and  the  incurring  of  many  obligations." 

LAKE  MILLS,*  Wis. — Early  in  1913  the  city  council  entered  into  a  con- 
tract with  The  Milwaukee  Electric  Railway  and  Light  Company  to  fur- 
nish electricity  to  operate  the  municipal  electric  light  plant  and  water 
works  system  for  a  period  of  three  years.  Bonds  to  the  amount  of 
$35,000  are  still  outstanding. 

According  to  the  Lake  Mills  Leader,  this  arrangement  is  expected  to 
result  in  a  saving  to  the  taxpayers  of  from  $1,000  to  $2,000  per  year. 

LAKEVIEW,  ORE. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant  was  sold  several 
years  ago  to  a  private  company. 

"They  were  running  their  small  plant  at  about  $200  a  month  loss," 
says  a  reliable  correspondent. 

LAKEWOOD,  OHIO — An  electric  plant  was  installed  in  1897  at  a  cost 
of  $25,000,  gradually  increased  to  about  $60,000.  The  authorities  charged 
the  city  $55  a  year  for  the  street  arcs.  This  seemed  reasonable,  but  after 
looking  at  their  tax  bills  some  of  the  citizens  came  to  the  conclusion  that 
this  sum  did  not  represent  all  the  cost,  and  called  in  a  firm  of  expert  ac- 


34  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

countants,  who  ascertained  that  the  actual  annual  cost  per  arc  had  been 
$129.56  for  the  seven  years  the  plant  had  been  in  operation,  although 
the  lights  had  been  run  on  moonlight  schedule.  The  citizens  twice  de- 
feated a  bond  issue  of  $25,000  to  improve  the  plant  and  finally  voted  to 
sell  the  plant,  which  was  disposed  of  early  in  1907  to  a  company  which 
contracted  to  light  the  streets  all  night  for  less  than  half  the  amount 
the  municipal  lights  cost  on  moonlight  schedule.  The  Cleveland  Leader 
said  that  this  sale  was  responsible  for  the  reduction  of  the  tax  rate  from 
$3.59  in  1906  to  $3.18  in  1907. 

LANGDON,  N.  D. — A  well-informed  citizen  writes: 

"The  city  bought  the  electric  light  plant  in  1902  for  $7,500,  and  added  about 
$10,000  in  improvements.  Four  and  a  half  years  later  the  plant  was  sold  for  $9,000, 
involving  a  capital  loss  of  $8,500.  In  addition  to  this  there  was  an  operating  loss 
of  $2,000  a  year,  making  a  total  loss  for  four  and  a  half  years  of  $17,500. 

"It  is  not  known  just  what  the  conditions  were,  but  the  above  statement  is  the 
closest  I  can  get,  as  the  accounts  of  the  lighting  business  were  mixed  with  the  rest 
of  the  city  accounts,  and  the  recorder  never  made  a  statement  showing  the  con- 
dition of  the  plant. 

"Whilst  the  plant  cost  the  city  over  $17,000,  it  cost  it  very  much  more  in  fac- 
tional fights,  as  when  the  plant  was  sold  there  was  nothing  too  mean  for  one  side 
to  say  and  do  against  the  other,  and  whatever  any  one  wanted  —  whether  it  were 
right  or  wrong  — he  had  to  fight  somebody  if  it  was  of  a  public  nature,  as  there 
was  no  harmony." 

The  present  owners  have  rebuilt  the  plant  and  it  is  now  said  to  be 
prospering. 

LAWRENCEVILLE,*  GA. — In  1903  a  municipal  electric  plant  was  installed 
at  a  cost  of  $8,000.  In  1913  the  city  made  a  contract  with  a  private  com- 
pany to  supply  current.  The  Electrical  World  states  that  the  estimated 
saving  will  be  about  $1,400  a  year. 

LAURENS,*  S.  C— The  electric  plant  was  installed  in  1897  at  a  cost  of 
$30,000.  The  generating  plant  was  shut  down  in  1908,  and  a  contract  for 
current  was  made  with  a  private  company. 

LAWSON,  Mo. — A  municipal  electric  plant  was  installed  in  1898  at  a 
cost  of  $4,000.  In  1908  the  city  clerk  wrote  that  there  was  no  longer  a 
plant  there ;  he  did  not  state  what  had  become  of  it. 

LEBANON,*  TENN. — Prior  to  1902  this  city  changed  from  private  to 
municipal  ownership.  In  1906  it  reversed  the  process  by  shutting  down 
its  generating  plant  and  contracting  for  current.  The  system  cost  $15,000, 
most  of  which  will  now  have  to  be  written  off  the  books. 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  35 

LEHIGH,  OKLA. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in 
1909.  On  April  25th,  1913,  the  citizens  voted  on  the  question  of  selling 
the  plant  to  a  private  company.  "The  proposition  carried  with  a  whoop," 
according  to  the  Lehigh  Leader.  The  vote  was  119  in  favor  of  the  sale 
and  19  against  it.  The  mayor  writes : 

"We  bonded  the  city  about  five  years  ago  for  $12,500  to  establish  an  electric  light 
plant.  I  was  elected  on  the  council  three  years  later,  when  there  was  much  dis- 
satisfaction among  the  citizens  in  regard  to  the  city  finances.  I  made  it  my  special 
business  to  audit  the  different  departments,  and  found  that  the  electric  light  plant, 
from  the  time  of  its  installation,  had  cost  the  city  $3.00  a  month  more  for  labor 
alone  than  the  entire  income  of  the  plant,  with  no  allowance  for  fuel,  wear  and 
tear,  etc. 

"In  checking  up  the  total  I  found  that  the  city  was  making  a  levy  of  from  $1,800 
to  $2,200  per  year  to  run  the  plant.  The  first  year  I  was  on  the  council  we  had 
to  close  the  plant  down  for  six  months  on  account  of  finances,  even  though  we  had 
cut  the  labor  down  to  the  very  lowest  margin. 

"About  six  months  ago  we  turned  the  plant  over  to  private  parties  for  them  to 
run  at  their  own  expense — all  earnings  to  go  to  them,  and  they  in  return  to  furnish 
street  lighting  to  the  city.  The  contract  was  not  lived  up  to,  so  the  city  council 
decided  to  sell  to  Chicago  parties  and  instructed  the  mayor  to  call  an  election  for 
the  voters  to  decide  whether  they  desired  to  sell  with  a  twenty-one  year  franchise 
to  the  company.  The  sale  of  the  plant  was  advertised  in  a  local  paper  for  five 
issues.  The  final  vote  showed  that  the  citizens  desired  to  sell  seven  to  one,  and  I 
think  the  deal  will  be  closed  within  the  next  thirty  days. 

"I  conclude  from  the  experience  here  that  it  would  be  almost  impossible  to  run 
a  municipal  light  and  water  system  without  a  loss.  Small  cities  do  not  pay  their 
councilmen  or  mayor  any  salary,  and  the  men  vitally  interested  have  other  busi- 
ness to  attend  to  and  do  not  care  to  mix  in  small  city  politics.  Hence,  councilmen 
are  elected  to  office  who  have  not  made  a  success  of  their  own  business  and  are 
not  competent  to  run  the  affairs  of  the  city.  It  is  hard  to  make  a  success  out  of  a 
business  that  is  everybody's  business,  and  it  is  practically  impossible  to  get  efficient 
men  to  run  any  municipal  undertaking. 

"From  this  letter  you  will  see  that  my  opinion  is  that  municipal  ownership  in  a 
small  city  is  a  failure.  I  understand  that  eight  out  of  every  ten  cities  of  our  size 
in  this  section  are  run  at  a  loss  about  like  ours,  and  I  believe  we  have  made  a  wise 
move  in  selling." 

LEHIGHTON,  PA. — The  chief  burgess  wrote  as  follows  in  1908  regard- 
ing the  electric  light  plant  formerly  operated  by  this  borough : 

"The  plant  was  transferred  to  Mr.  J.  I.  Blakelee  May  17,  1900,  for  a  period  of 
25  years  for  $23,600,  this  being  the  bonded  indebtedness  at  the  time  of  lease,  he 
to  pay  $1,000  per  year  on  the  debt  and  the  interest  on  the  bonds.  The  reason 
for  leasing  the  plant  was  that  the  borough  could  not  run  it  at  a  profit.  The  year 
before  the  transfer  the  borough  went  in  the  hole  $2,500,  without  paying  anything  on 
the  principal.  The  real  cause  of  the  failure  was  too  much  politics." 

LEMOORE,  CAL. — In  1902  this  town  installed  an  electric  light  plant  and 
waterworks  at  a  cost  of  $24,000.  The  business  was  unprofitable,  not- 
withstanding the  fact  that  15  cents  per  kwt.  was  charged  for  light  or 


36  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

power  giving  only  night  service.  When  a  private  company  took  over 
the  plant  in  1908  at  a  fraction  of  its  cost,  it  immediately  reduced  the 
rates  35  per  cent. 

The  Lemoore  Republican  comments  editorially  on  the  change: 
"At  last  Lemoore  is  to  have  electric  power  that  will  give  the  people  service  for 
their  money.  Municipal  ownership  has  proved  a  failure  in  Lemoore  as  it  has  in 
all  small  towns.  The  people  demanded  a  better  service  than  they  were  receiving, 
and  business  developments  demanded  day  power  which  the  municipal  plant  was 
unable  to  furnish,  consequently  our  city  fathers  have  acted  wisely  in  selling  the 
plant  out  to  a  corporation  that  can  guarantee  the  patrons  that  if  no  service  is  given 
no  pay  will  be  demanded." 

LEON,  IOWA — The  mayor  wrote  in  1908  in  regard  to  the  electric  plant : 
"Original  cost  $10,000f;  sold  for  $5,000.  Sold  because  the  city  was  getting  in 
debt  worse  every  year  on  account  of  plant.  At  one  time  the  city  had  to  issue  bonds 
in  the  sum  of  $5,000  to  pay  outstanding  warrants.  This  was  four  years  ago.  Two 
years  ago  when  the  city  sold  the  plant  there  were  about  J3,000  outstanding  warrants. 
Cost  of  light  about  the  same  now  as  when  the  plant  was  owned  by  the  city,  but 
service  much  better." 

The  plant  is  said  to  be  thriving  under  its  present  management. 

LE  ROY,  N.  Y. — In  1899  the  citizens  voted  to  purchase  the  electric 
light  plant.  After  operating  it  a  few  months  the  city  took  advantage  of  a 
technicality  and  turned  it  over  to  the  former  owners  without  having  made 
any  payment  to  them.  It  is  stated  that  while  run  by  the  city  the  operating 
expenses  alone  exceeded  by  60  per  cent  the  entire  cost  of  lights  under 
private  management. 

LEWISBURG,  TENN. — The  electric  plant,  installed  in  1903  at  a  cost  of 
$6,000,  was  sold  in  1908  for  $3,500.  The  plant  was  not  large  enough  to 
take  care  of  the  increased  business,  and  the  city  could  not  enlarge  it  be- 
cause it  had  reached  the  limit  of  its  bonded  indebtedness. 

LEXINGTON,*  N.  C. — The  mayor  writes  that  about  1910  this  town  sold 
its  generating  equipment,  and  has  since  purchased  current  from  a  private 
plant. 

LISBON,  OHIO — The  municipal  lighting  plant  has  been  sold  to  W.  S. 
Tasker,  according  to  the  Electrical  World  for  March  23,  1912.  The 
editor  of  the  Lisbon  Herald  states  that  the  municipality  sold  the  plant 
because  "it  was  badly  in  need  of  repairs  and  the  citizens  wished  to  secure 
continuous  service." 


fAnother  authority  states  that  $13,000  had  been  spent  on  construction  and  equip- 
ment before  the  plant  was  sold. 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  37 

LOCKPORT,  ILL. — The  village  electric  plant,  installed  at  a  cost  of 
$20,000,  was  leased  in  1907  to  the  Sanitary  Department  of  Chicago  for  a 
nominal  consideration,  as  the  plant  was  a  failure.  Just  prior  to  the  lease 
the  superintendent  wrote : 

"We  are  running  about  $300  to  $350  in  debt  every  month,  due  to  political  handling. 
Too  many  political  friends  and  too  low  rates,  etc." 

LOWELL,  IND. — In  1901  this  town  purchased  for  $6,500  the  electric 
light  plant  which  had  been  installed  two  years  before.  In  1907  the  plant 
was  sold  for  $2,730,  the  difference  between  this  and  the  purchase  price 
representing  a  depreciation  of  ten  per  cent  a  year.  The  purchaser  in- 
stalled a  new  plant  as  the  old  one  was  worth  only  about  $1,500  as  junk. 
The  reasons  assigned  for  the  sale  are  that  the  plant  was  being  run  at  a 
loss  and  was  in  very  bad  condition,  while  the  town  was  so  heavily  bonded 
that  it  could  not  install  a  new  plant.  A  25-year  franchise  went  with  the 
plant. 

LYONS,  IOWA — The  electric  light  plant  installed  in  1889  at  a  cost 
of  $13,000,  was  sold  for  $5,000  in  1902,  when  Lyons  was  annexed  to 
Clinton,  because  better  and  cheaper  service  could  be  obtained  from  a 
company. 

McADoo,  PA.— The  electric  plant,  installed  in  1899  at  a  cost  of 
$10,000,  was  leased  in  January,  1908,  for  25  years.  In  the  agreement 
the  situation  was  set  forth  by  the  council  as  follows: 

"The  borough  is  now  owner  of  a  certain  municipal  electric  light  plant  in  the 
said  borough,  and  in  the  operation  thereof  has  encountered  certain  losses  to  such 
an  extent  that  the  cost  of  operation  and  maintenance  together  with  the  interest  on 
the  bonded  indebtedness  incurred  by  reason  of  the  erection  of  the  said  municipal 
plant,  exceeds  the  income  derived  therefrom." 

The  amount  of  revenue  collected  during  1907  is  said  to  have  been 
about  $1,000  less  than  the  operating  expenses. 

MADISON,  IND. — This  city  installed  an  electric  light  plant  in  1896  at  a 
cost  of  $13,000,  not  including  steam  plant.  Two  years  later  the 
plant  was  sold  for  $6,000.  The  operating  expenses  alone  amounted  to 
about  $45  a  lamp,  which  implies  a  total  cost  per  lamp  of  approximately 
$100  a  year.  The  purchasers  agreed  to  supply  lights  at  $80  a  year, 
and  to  install  and  operate  an  electric  railway. 

MADISONVILLE,  OHIO — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant,  installed 
in  1895,  at  a  cost  of  $86,000,  was  shut  down  in  March,  1912,  because  of 
the  annexation  of  Madisonville  to  Cincinnati. 


38  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

MADOC,*  ONT. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant  at  Madoc,  which 
began  operation  in  1905,  shut  down  its  generating  plant  at  the  end  of 
five  years,  and  is  now  purchasing  current  from  the  Seymour  Power 
Company.  The  village  clerk  writes : 

"We  could  secure  the  electric  power  so  much  cheaper  that  we  made  the  change. 
We  now  have  a  twenty-four  hour  service  for  the  same  price — or  a  little  less  than 
what  a  seven  hour  service  cost." 

MANSFIELD,  LA. — The  municipal  electric  plant  was  sold  in  1908.  The 
Municipal  Journal  and  Engineer  states  that  it  cost  about  $8,000  and  was 
sold  for  $6,150;  also  that  the  sale  was  made  because  the  city  had  gone 
"dry"  and  could  no  longer  use  the  income  from  licenses  to  make  payments 
on  the  plant  as  they  came  due. 

MARCUS,  IOWA — The  municipal  gas  plant  was  seriously  damaged  by 
fire  in  1908,  a  short  time  before  the  bonds  were  due.  It  had  not  proved  a 
paying  investment,  but  something  had  to  be  done,  so  it  was  repaired  and 
leased  for  five  years. 

MARENGO,  ILL. — The  city  electric  light  plant  was  leased  early  in  1908 
for  twenty  years.  The  service  is  said  to  have  been  both  inadequate  and 
unprofitable.  When  the  city  gave  up  the  undertaking  the  mayor  wrote: 

"Our  reason  for  doing  this  is  that  we  consider  municipal  management  a  complete 
failure  and  the  less  there  is  of  it  the  better  for  all  parties  concerned." 

"The  old  municipal  plant  has  been  'junked'  and  the  private  company  has  in- 
stalled new  and  modern  equipment." 

MARION,*  IND. — As  a  majority  of  the  citizens  of  Marion  had  become 
weary  of  the  results  of  municipal  operation  of  the  lighting  plant,  it  was 
decided,  in  1910,  to  buy  current  from  a  private  company. 

The  city  still  owns  and  maintains  its  distributing  system,  and  makes 
all  extensions  at  its  own  expense. 

It  is  estimated  that  with  the  purchased  current  the  city  is  saving  $20 
per  year  on  each  of  its  three  hundred  arc  lamps.  This  saving  seems 
to  cause  general  satisfaction  to  the  citizens,  although  the  municipal  owner- 
ship followers  were  very  active  in  opposing  the  change. 

MARSH ALLTOWN,  IOWA — In  answer  to  an  inquiry  regarding  the  muni- 
cipal electric  light  plant  the  editor  of  the  Marshalltown  Times-Republican 
writes  under  date  of  December  10,  1912,  as  follows: 

"The  Iowa  Railway  and  Light  Company  has  recently  been  voted  a  franchise  in 
this  city  to  furnish  electricity,  gas  and  street  power  railway  service.  The  vote  of 
our  citizens  was  overwhelming." 

The  plant  was  installed  at  a  cost  of  $26,000. 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  39 

MENDON,  MICH. — The  town  of  Mendon,  after  eight  years  of  ex- 
perience with  municipal  electric  lighting,  gave  a  thirty-year  franchise 
to  a  private  company  in  1912.  The  whole  property  has  been  sold  for 
$11,000. 

The  editor  of  the  Mendon  Leader  wrote  shortly  before  the  sale : 

"Every  spring  a  new  council  goes  in,  and  just  as  they  are  ready  to  accomplish 
something  they  are  retired  and  others  fill  their  places,  as  it  usually  takes  a  year  for 
a  village  board  to  get  a  good  grasp  upon  affairs.  Just  to  illustrate— it  is  said  that 
one  man,  a  barber,  ordered  his  house  wired.  It  was  done,  but  time  passed  and  he 
was  never  presented  with  a  bill.  A  year  passed  and  finally  the  village  began  to 
collect  50  cents  a  month,  but  never  collected  for  the  year.  And  thus  the  story  runs. 
The  minimum  rate  until  last  November,  was  50  cents  per  month  and  if  the  house- 
holder or  merchant  did  not  feel  like  paying,  he  kept  his  money  in  his  pocket — and 
his  lights  went  on  just  the  same.  People  openly  and  boldly  stole  from  the  village. 
Even  now  some  stores,  open  every  night,  and  well  lighted,  are  paying  75  cents  per 
month. 

"To  sum  it  all  up,  the  cause  in  our  case  for  failure  is  mismanagement  pure  and 
simple — simply  a  succession  of  mistakes  and  oversights.  Not  that  any  one  person 
is  at  fault  particularly. 

"The  village  has  a  bonded  indebtedness  of  about  $9,000,  and  besides  owes  for 
money  borrowed  for  running  expenses  somewhere  near  $4,000.  We  originally  bonded 
for  $10,000  and  purchased  a  water  power  6  miles  west;  then,  instead  of  letting  the 
contract  for  placing  water  wheels,  etc.,  the  council  undertook  to  complete  the  work 
by  hiring  day  labor.  When  the  $10,000  was  nearly  spent,  they  asked  the  people  for 
more  money;  but  instead  of  giving  it  to  them,  the  people  demanded  to  know  what 
they  were  going  to  get  when  the  project  was  completed.  Two  experienced  engineers 
came,  looked  the  stream  over,  and  reported  from  25  to  150  H.  P.  with  only  25  to 
35  H.  P.  during  low  water.  Then  the  people  bolted  and  refused  another  penny. 
Work  was  stopped  and  nothing  further  has  been  done  with  the  water  power,  except 
for  the  taxpayers  to  dig  up  the  money  to  pay  off  the  bonds — one  or  two  for  $1,000, 
with  interest,  having  already  been  paid.  A  private  company  then  came  forward  and 
offered  to  pay  the  village  a  little  more  than  $11,000  for  the  entire  holdings,  and  a 
30-year  franchise  for  commercial  and  street  lighting,  the  latter  at  $1,000  per  year. 
The  company  is  now  soliciting  stock  subscriptions,  the  people  having  already  voted 
to  sell,  and  as  soon  as  they  get  the  money  the  entire  property  will  be  turned  over." 

MENTONE,  IND. — According  to  the  mayor  the  electric  plant  was 
purchased  in  1899  from  a  private  company  for  $2,000,  and  was  sold  in 
1903  for  $600  because  it  was  a  "losing  proposition." 

MICHIGAN,  CITY,  IND. — Said  to  have  cost  $10,000  and  been  sold  for 
$2,500  after  they  found  that  lights  were  costing  a  third  more  than  they 
could  get  them  for  by  contract. 

The  editor  of  the  local  paper  gives  the  following  reasons  for  the  fail- 
ure of  municipal  operation : 

"Local  political  graft ;  incompetence  of  officials ;  incompetence  of  employes,  chosen 
for  political  strength,  political  reward  and  political  graft." 


40  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

MIDWAY,  KY. — After  being  in  operation  less  than  two  years  the  muni- 
cipal electric  plant  was  sold  in  1913  to  a  private  company.  The  editor  of 
the  Midway  Clipper  writes  that  the  sale  was  a  matter  of  expediency,  as 
the  plant  was  too  small  and  the  private  company  offered  to  light  the  town 
at  a  figure  somewhat  less  than  it  was  costing  under  municipal  ownership. 

MILFORD  CENTER,  OHIO — The  electric  light  and  water  works,  bonded 
for  $12,000,  were  sold  at  auction  in  1907  for  $5,335.  The  president  of 
the  village  writes: 

"The  reason  for  the  sale  of  the  municipal  light  and  water  plant  is  the  failure  of 
municipal  ownership  to  operate  the  plant  as  economically  as  private  interests  could." 

J.  L.  Boylan,  of  the  board  of  trustees  of  public  affairs,  writes  more 
fully: 

"On  account  of  a  fast  increasing  deficiency  it  is  deemed  best  to  dispose  of  the 
plant.  We  have  had  twelve  years  of  municipal  ownership,  and  have  been  fortunate 
in  getting  good  business  men  at  the  head ;  yet  the  plant  has  never  been  on  a  self- 
supporting  basis,  and  is  now  in  need  of  a  great  amount  of  repair  without  any  better 
outlook  for  sufficient  income  to  warrant  expense.  We  therefore  wish  to  get  rid  of 
a  'white  elephant.' " 

Fire  and  Water  Engineering  said  that  the  plants  had  "been  running 
behind  at  the  rate  of  $1,200  a  year,  owing  to  inexperienced  men  being  in 
charge." 

Further  enquiry  has  produced  the  following  letter  from  another  citizen 
of  Milford: 

"In  the  year  1907  I  was  one  of  a  committee  of  five  that  went  over  the  books  of  this 
municipal  plant,  and  if  I  know  anything  about,  business,  I  will  say  that  the  plant  was 
grossly  mismanaged.  The  plant  was  allowed  to  run  down  until  it  was  impossible 
to  give  but  the  poorest  service.  When  I  came  here  in  1906  I  offered  to  pay  $15  per 
year  flat  rate,  for  lighting  my  residence.  This  offer  was  refused,  and  I  was  in- 
formed that  unless  I  installed  a  meter  and  paid  their  regular  rate  of  8  cents  that  I 
could  not  have  light.  I  did  so  and  my  light  bill  only  amounted  to  from  25  to  45 
cents  per  month,  as  they  had  no  minimum  rate.  We  found  that  a  great  many  patrons 
were  paying  as  low  as  four  cents  a  month  for  light. 

"The  water  rate  was  $6.00  per  year  flat. 

"The  village  dug  a  well  at  a  cost  of  $1,200,  which  was  worth  about  $375,  and 
there  was  no  itemized  account  to  show  where  the  money  went  to.  We  found  no 
account  of  any  money  received  from  the  sale  of  meters  or  supplies,  although  we 
might  not  have  understood  their  method  of  bookkeeping. 

"The  people  here  seemed  to  think  that  because  it  was  a  municipal  plant  they 
should  not  pay  anything  for  service.  The  result  was  failure.  There  was  too  much 
handicap  in  the  matter  of  policy  in  operation  for  anyone,  no  matter  how  good  a 
business  man  he  might  have  been,  to  make  a  success  of  the  plant." 

MILLERS  FALLS,*  MASS. — After  being  in  operation  only  four  years 
the  generating  plant  was  closed  down  in  1907,  and  a  contract  for  current 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting   Plants  41 

was  made  with  a  private  company.  The  outstanding  bonds  amount  to 
$15,000.  The  last  available  report  (1906),  shows  that,  although  the 
lamps  were  of  only  1,500  candle-power  and  burned  only  3.53  hours  a 
night,  they  cost  $75.91  a  year.  As  only  3  per  cent  was  allowed  for  depre- 
ciation and  there  was  no  allowance  for  lost  taxes,  etc.,  the  real  cost  was 
of  course  much  higher. 

MISHAWAKA,  IND. — The  city  installed  an  electric  light  and  water 
plant  in  1890  at  a  cost  of  $60,000.  It  was  forced  to  sell  the  plant,  but 
rents  and  operates  it,  although  since  1904  most  of  the  current  has  been 
purchased.  The  mayor  wrote  in  1908 : 

"Our  city  water  and  electric  light  plant  was  transferred  to  the  Mishawaka 
Public  Utility  Co.  in  1903,  and  has  since  been  operated  by  the  city  under  lease  from 
said  Utility  Co.  This  was  done  because  means  were  desired  to  make  other  improve- 
ments, viz.,  erecting  a  city  building,  installing  a  paid  fire  department,  etc.,  and  the 
city  being  bonded  to  nearly  the  constitutional  limit,  no  other  method  could  be  de- 
vised to  accomplish  this  end.  Being  entirely  inadequate  and  no  means  to  enlarge, 
this  was  deemed  the  better  way." 

MODESTO,  CAL. — The  mayor  writes  that  the  electric  plant  was  pur- 
chased about  1899  for  $3,500.  Another  correspondent  gives  $2,500  as  the 
original  purchase  price,  and  assigns  the  following  reasons  for  the  shutting 
down  of  the  city  plant  and  leasing  the  distributing  system: 

"The  city  was  able  to  buy  power  cheaper  than  it  could  generate  it.  Moreover 
new  boilers  were  needed,  the  city  had  provided  no  renewal  fund,  and  the  people 
disliked  the  idea  of  bonding.  The  waterworks  also  were  leased  to  private  parties." 

MOHAWK,*  N.  Y.— In  1897  this  village  installed  an  electric  light  plant, 
issuing  bonds  for  $21,000  in  payment  therefor.  By  1904  the  authori- 
ties realized  that  it  was  costing  too  much,  the  generating  plant  was  shut 
down,  and  a  contract  was  made  with  a  company  to  supply  current,  take 
full  charge  of  maintaining  the  street  lights,  and  pump  the  water  for  the 
village.  This  arrangement  is  said  to  be  satisfactory.  According  to 
Public  Service  the  net  saving  to  the  village  was  not  less  than  $3,800  the 
first  year.  The  smallest  annual  deficit  had  previously  been  $3,000. 

The  superintendent  of  the  Mohawk  municipal  commission  writes: 

"Political  mismanagement  was  the  cause  of  the  failure,  and  it  was  very  expensive 
to  the  taxpayer." 

MOLINE,  ILL. — The  city  clerk  wrote  in  1908  in  regard  to  the  electric 
light  plant: 

"Original  cost,  $12,000.    Terms,  cash. 

"The  cost  of  operating  the  plant  while  owned  by  the  city  is  very  hard  to  deter- 
mine, from  the  fact  that  the  plant  was  at  that  time  operated  in  connection  with  the 


4:2  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

waterworks;  the  books  show  that  appropriations  were  made  for  both  plants  under 
one  item. 

"The  reason  for  disposing  of  the  plant:  the  plant  being  what  was  then  known 
as  the  old  U.  S.  system,  which  company  had  gone  out  of  business,  hence  repairs  for 
our  plant  could  not  be  obtained,  and  as  the  same  was  about  worn  out,  the  only 
thing,  therefore,  the  council  had  to  do  was  the  construction  of  a  new  plant  or  to 
light  the  city  under  contract.  The  latter  was  adopted  for  the  reason  that  the  finances 
of  the  city  at  the  time  did  not  allow  the  construction  of  a  new  plant." 

According  to  a  local  paper  the  amount  invested  in  the  plant  at  the 
time  it  was  sold  was  $25,910,  and  the  selling  price  was  $7,900.  The  city 
went  into  the  business  because  it  was  claimed  that  lights  could  be  run 
for  about  two-thirds  the  price  charged  by  a  private  company.  Although 
1,200-c.p.  lamps  were  used,  and  those  on  moonlight  schedule,  the  oper- 
ating cost  was  found  to  be  $54.50.  The  addition  of  interest,  depreciation, 
etc.,  would  have  brought  this  up  to  about  $100.  The  present  contract 
price  for  2,000-c.p.  lamps  burning  all  night  is  $65. 

MONTICELLO,*  GA. — The  municipal  electric  light  and  water  company 
has  begun  the  purchase  of  power  from  a  private  company. 

MONTPELIER,  IND. — An  electrical  engineer,  who  devoted  some  weeks 
to  rehabilitating  it,  writes  that  the  municipal  electric  light  plant  was  a 
complete  failure,  and  that  it  was  turned  over  to  the  present  owners  for 
$1.00  on  condition  that  they  would  assume  the  outstanding  bonds 
($38,000).  The  city  got  nothing  for  the  funds  contributed  by  the  citizens 
to  make  repairs.  Another  authority  states  that  for  three  months  before 
the  sale  there  had  been  no  street  lights  available,  and  for  part  of  that 
period  no  incandescent  lights.  The  plant  was  installed  in  1901  and  sold 
in  1905. 

MOORESVILLE,*  N.  C. — The  superintendent  wrote  in  1908 : 
"The  generating  part  of  our  electric  light  plant  has  been  shut  down  and  is  for 
sale.    We  have  contract  for  current  with  Southern  Power  Co.  of  Charlotte,  N.  C 
Our  reason  for  this  action  is  that  we  reduce  our  operating  expenses." 

MUNCIE,  IND.— The  electric  plant,  installed  in  1892  at  a  cost  of 
$36,000  was  shut  down  in  1906,  and  the  remains  of  the  machinery  were 
sold  as  scrap  for  a  fraction  of  its  cost.  The  immediate  cause  of  the  shut- 
ting down  was  the  bursting  of  a  fly-wheel.  As  no  depreciation  fund  had 
been  provided,  nor  any  payments  made  on  the  bonds,  the  city  was  not  in 
a  position  to  rehabilitate  the  plant. 

The  last  annual  report  of  the  superintendent  showed  that  the  plant 
had  been  steadily  deteriorating  ever  since  it  was  started,  so  that  in  eleven 
years  the  operating  cost  per  lamp  had  nearly  doubled,  although  the 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  43 

increase  in  the  number  of  arcs  from  102  to  234  should  normally  have 
reduced  the  cost  per  lamp.  After  calling  attention  to  the  worn-out  con- 
dition of  various  parts  of  the  equipment,  and  the  large  fuel  consump- 
tion resulting  therefrom,  the  superintendent  closed  his  report  with  a 
statement  of  unusual  frankness : 

"I  am  forced  to  the  conclusion  that  if  the  city  cannot  find  the  money  with  which  to 
improve  its  plant  so  as  to  give  its  citizens  additional  lights  needed  at  a  reasonable 
cost,  it  had  better  sell  to  private  parties.  I  am  satisfied  that  the  council  could  make 
arrangements  with  some  private  corporation  to  obtain  an  unlimited  amount  of  electric 
power  for  3  or  3l/2  cents  per  thousand  watts.  If  so,  you  could  shut  down  your 
present  plant  (holding  it  in  reserve)  and  operate  your  street  lights  at  a  saving  of 
from  three  to  five  thousand  dollars  per  annum  over  the  present  cost." 

As  reported  in  the  Muncie  Evening  Press  a  member  of  the  city  council 
said: 

"It  is  a  matter  of  common  knowledge  that  the  city  plant  has  been  a  'white  ele- 
phant.' It  has  been  mismanaged  at  various  times  by  various  committees  from  council 
and  it  has  never,  or  at  least  very  seldom,  been  operated  as  a  man  would  operate  his 
private  business.  The  machinery  that  has  been  in  use  there  should  have  been  rele- 
gated to  the  junk  pile  long  ago.  It  is  not  economical  and  it  does  not  work  together 
to  make  a  harmonious  whole.  We  could  long  ago  have  been  able  to  secure  a  private 
contract  for  street  lighting  that  would  have  cost  less  money  than  to  operate  our  own 
plant,  and  that  would  have  given  the  city  better  service. 

"One  trouble  has  been  that  the  committees  from  council  that  have  had  charge  of 
the  street  lighting  department  in  the  past  were,  of  course,  persons  who  did  not  un- 
derstand the  business.  They  would  go  down  to  the  station  and  look  at  the  wheels 
go  'round  and  at  the  same  time  understand  nothing  about  it.  These  committees, 
acting  under  advice,  made  frequent  changes  and  repairs,  some  of  which  were  neces- 
sary and  some  of  which  were  not,  but  nearly  all  of  which  were  expensive.  About 
the  time  a  council  committee  began  to  understand  a  little  bit  about  the  business,  the 
terms  of  the  members  as  councilmen  expired  and  a  'green'  committee  would  again 
take  up  the  work  of  mismanagement." 

MURRAY,  KY .— In  1907  this  city  purchased  the  local  electric  plant,  but 
evidently  soon  rued  its  bargain,  as  it  sold  again  within  a  year. 

NAPANEE,  ONT—  About  1907  a  municipal  electric  light  plant  was  in- 
stalled at  a  cost  of  $35,000.  In  1911  the  town  accepted  a  proposition 
from  the  Seymour  Power  and  Electric  Company  to  take  over  the  muni- 
cipal plant,  they  agreeing  to  furnish  light  to  private  consumers  and  for 
the  streets  at  20  per  cent  less  than  had  been  charged  by  the  commissioners. 

NASHVILLE,  ARK.— By  vote  of  the  city  council  the  municipal  gas  plant 
was  closed  down  in  January,  1908.  Although  the  price  of  gas  was  $3.00 
a  thousand,  the  expenses  were  nearly  double  the  receipts.  The  mayor  of 
Nashville  made  the  following  statement  at  the  time  of  the  failure : 

"The  reason  of  such  action  by  the  council  is  that  it  could  not  make  it  self-sustain- 


44  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting   Plants 

ing ;  but  the  council  has  since  leased  it  for  two  years  to  the  former  general  manager, 
who  thinks  he  can  make  it  pay  under  private  management." 

The  manager  evidently  knew  that  with  a.  free  hand  he  could  steer 
clear  of  some  of  the  snags  that  could  not  be  avoided  under  city  manage- 
ment. 

The  present  mayor  writes  that  the  town  lost  "something  like  $10,000 
on  the  deal." 

"The  feeling  of  the  people  in  regard  to  municipal  ownership  is  against  it,  particu- 
larly in  towns  the  size  of  ours — 2,500 — located  in  this  part  of  the  country." 

NEEDHAM,  MASS. — In  1893  the  town  installed  a  distributing  plant  at 
a  cost  of  $13,774,  to  which  considerable  additions  have  since  been  made. 
By  vote  of  the  town  the  plant  was  sold  in  February,  1908,  for  $11,000 
and  a  20-year  contract  for  street  lighting  was  made  with  the  company 
that  for  several  years  had  been  supplying  the  current.  The  town  clerk 
sums  up  the  reason  for  this  action  in  one  word,  "economy." 

NEPQNSET,  ILL. — In  the  spring  of  1913  the  city  council  accepted  a 
$3,000  bid  from  the  Spring  Valley  Company  for  the  purchase  of  the  muni- 
cipal electric  lighting  plant.  The  mayor  writes : 

"The  plant  is  small  and  has  been  run  by  the  village  at  a  cost  of  approximately 
$30  per  month  for  three  years." 

NEW  CARLISLE,  IND. — The  municipal  electric  plant  at  New  Carlisle 
has  been  sold  to  private  parties,  after  being  in  operation  about  three 
years.  The  town  clerk  writes  very  briefly  that  he  cannot  give  any  figures 
of  the  town's  loss. 

"Failure  was  because  of  an  overloaded  dynamo." 

NEW  RICHMOND,*  Wis. — The  generating  plant,  installed  in  1892,  was 
shut  down  five  years  later,  when  current  was  secured  in  exchange  for  a 
franchise. 

NEW  WESTMINSTER,*  B.  C. — This  city  installed  an  electric  plant  in 
1900  at  a  cost  of  $132,000.  In  1905  the  generating  plant  was  closed  down 
and  a  contract  made  for  current.  The  generating  plant  has  since  been 
sold. 

NEW  YORK,*  N.  Y.— In  1905  New  York  installed,  at  a  cost  of  $122,348, 
a  combined  rubbish  incinerator  and  electric  light  plant,  the  current  devel- 
oped being  used  to  light  the  Williamsburg  Bridge.  The  intention  was  to 
effect  a  saving  over  the  cost  of  lighting  the  bridge  by  contract,  and  after 
the  plant  had  been  in  operation  six  months  Commissioner  Woodbury  esti- 
mated that  the  saving  amounted  to  about  40  per  cent. 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  45 

It  was  therefore  somewhat  of  a  surprise  when,  in  1907,  the  lighting 
plant  was  shut  down.  The  engineers  in  charge  frankly  admitted  that  the 
plant  had  been  run  at  a  loss,  and  although  they  are  chary  about  giving 
figures,  the  best  information  obtainable  is  to  the  fact  that  the  loss 
amounted  to  about  $25,000  a  year,  as  compared  with  the  cost  by  contract. 
In  other  words,  it  cost  the  city,  with  free  fuel,  about  twice  as  much  to 
light  the  bridge  as  a  private  company  charges,  although  the  company  has 
to  buy  its  fuel. 

The  commissioner  of  bridges,  in  an  official  communication  dated  Feb- 
ruary 29,  1908,  says : 

"The  plant  formerly  used  for  lighting  the  Williamsburg  bridge,  at  the  foot  of 
Delancey  street,  in  the  borough  of  Manhattan,  was  abandoned  about  a  year  ago,  it 
having  been  demonstrated  to  be  more  economical  to  light  the  bridge  through  contracts 
with  the  electric  lighting  companies." 

A  well-informed  citizen  has  supplied  the  following  facts  relating  to  this 
costly  experiment: 

"The  awakening  came  when  the  city  officials  found  that  all  of  the  electric  current 
obtained  through  the  operation  of  the  electrical  part  of  this  plant  could  be  purchased 
at  the  prevailing  prices  from  the  local  supplying  company  at  a  cost  slightly  in  excess 
of  $20,000  annually.  Naturally,  it  did  not  take  long  to  abandon  permanently  the 
electrical  plant  and  utilize  the  commercial  service,  which  had  not  only  the  advantage 
of  relative  cheapness,  but  of  continuity,  avoiding  the  frequent  interruptions,  incidental 
to  the  operation  of  the  destructor  plant,  and  of  regularity  of  pressure,  in  contrast 
with  the  constant  variation  of  the  pressure  which  resulted  from  the  operation  of  the 
incinerator.  Again  there  was  an  unlimited  service,  which  was  not  always  available 
from  the  incinerator. 

"Summarized,  the  losses  incidental  to  the  operation  of  this  incinerator,  as  a  com- 
mercial venture,  appear  somewhat  as  follows: 

Total  expenditure   for  equipment,  operation   and  maintenance,  for  18 

months $149,313.32 

Salvage — 

Two  electrical  units  sold  at  public  auction $1,130 

One   electrical    unit   utilized   in   another  borough,    estimated 

value  . 750 

Boilers  now  being  utilized  elsewhere  by  the  city,  net  value 
estimated 1,000          2,880.00 


Net  cost  of  investment  and  operation  for  18  months $146,433.32 

Cost  of  corresponding  service  if  purchased  from  a  private  corporation, 

for  18  months  at  the  high  estimate  of  $25,000  annually 37,500.00 


Net  loss  to  the  city  on  this  venture  for  18  months $108,933.32 

"It  need  not  be  pointed  out  that  in  addition  the  city  lost  the  taxes  on  this  increased 
income  which  the  private  corporation  would  have  paid ;  no  realty  taxes  were  included 
in  the  cost  of  operation  because  the  plant  was  built  on  city  property ;  the  cost  of  the 
water  consumed  by  the  boilers  was  not  included.  Nor,  as  is  quite  customary  in 
municipal  operations  of  this  character  was  the  cost  of  a  large  amount  of  labor  fur- 


46  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

nished  by  other  departments  included  in  the  recorded  maintenance  and  upkeep  ex- 
penditures of  the  electrical  part  of  the  destructor  plant." 

One  of  the  worst  features  of  this  plant  was  its  adoption  of  the  padrone 
system,  the  labor  required  for  feeding  and  stoking  having  been  furnished 
by  an  Italian  "contractor,"  who  seems  to  have  made  a  very  good  thing 
out  of  it. 

The  city  paid  him  25  cents  an  hour  per  man,  and  as  the  men  worked 
12  hours  a  night,  this  amounted  to  $3.00  a  night  per  man.  Yet  it  is 
asserted  that  the  men  received  on  an  average  only  $1.00  a  night.  It  is 
apparent,  therefore,  that  the  city  paid  three  times  what  the  labor  was 
worth  or  that  the  men  received  for  their  labor  only  one-third  of  what 
they  earned. 

NORTHFIELD,*  VT. — The  electric  plant  was  installed  in  1896  and 
burned  down  in  1904.  In  his  "Business  of  Municipalities  and  Private 
Corporations  Compared,"  M.  J.  Francisco  gives  the  following  account  of 
this  plant: 

"They  had  a  small  water  power  and  were  informed  that  it  would  furnish  power 
for  all  the  lights  and  motors  that  could  be  used  in  the  village.  Soon  after  the  plant 
was  installed  they  discovered  that  the  water  wheels  would  not  answer  and  new  ones 
costing  $4,400  had  to  be  provided ;  the  dam  failed  and  a  new  one  must  be  built  at  an 
expense  of  $4,297.52.  Then  the  water  partially  failed  so  that  there  was  not  enough 
to  carry  the  load  and  a  steam  plant  had  to  be  installed,  making  a  total  outlay  of 
$50,000.  As  a  climax  the  plant  burned  up  and  the  loss  was  $10,000  more  than  the 
insurance.  They  called  a  meeting  of  the  taxpayers  and  voted  not  to  rebuild,  but  to 
make  a  contract  with  a  private  company  to  furnish  the  lights  and  run  motors  for 
$4,500  per  year,  the  village  owning  the  lines  and  lamps.  The  operating  expenses 
alone  were  over  $7,000  per  year  while  the  municipality  operated  the  plant,  and  all 
this  outlay  and  loss  has  accrued  within  nine  years." 

PELHAM,  GA. — This  water,  light  and  electric  plant,  which  was  orig- 
inally installed  at  a  cost  of  $65,000,  has  been  leased  for  several  years. 

PETERBORO,  N.  H. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant,  installed  in 
1902  at  a  cost  of  $18,000,  has  been  sold  to  a  private  company.  One  of  the 
selectmen  writes  under  date  of  July  3,  1913,  as  follows : 

"The  town's  charter  permitted  them  to  run  only  until  12  o'clock  at  night  from 
dark.  The  people  wanted  24-hour  service  of  any  and  all  kinds,  and  they  had  a 
chance  to  sell  and  get  a  good  price  and  did  it. 

"As  a  rule  we  are  having  good  service  and  at  less  cost  than  when  the  town 
owned  it,  and  most  of  the  people  are  satisfied. 

PHILADELPHIA,  PA. — For  five  years  after  they  were  started,  in  1836, 
the  gas  works  of  Philadelphia  were  owned  by  private  citizens,  but  were 
operated  by  a  board  of  trustees  appointed  by  the  city  councils.  In  1841 
the  city  bought  out  the  owners,  but  the  board  of  trustees  was  continued 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  47 

until  1887,  when  the  management  was  transferred  to  the  department  of 
public  works.  During  the  latter  part  of  the  trusteeship  the  jobbery,  waste 
and  mismanagement  was  a  public  scandal,  and  Professor  Bryce  states  that 
the  "gas  ring"  controlled  20,000  votes  and  used  them  to  prolong  its  reign. 

Even  after  its  transfer  to  the  department  of  public  works  the  plant 
was  regarded  primarily  as  a  political  asset,  and  was  allowed  to  run  down 
until  in  1897  Thomas  M.  Thompson,  director  of  the  department,  testified 
before  a  committee  of  councils: 

"Our  mains  and  services  are  a  disgrace  to  the  city.  We  have  not  the  facilities  for 
taking  the  gas  from  the  plants  and  giving  our  citizens  the  gas  which  they  have  a  right 
to  expect  and  demand." 

Mr.  Thompson  added  that  on  account  of  inadequate  mains  certain 
sections  got  "very  poor  gas  or  none  at  all,"  and  submitted  figures  to  show 
that  from  five  to  six  millions  of  dollars  were  imperatively  needed  to  make 
the  service  adequate. 

The  spirit  that  produced  this  condition  is  well  illustrated  by  the  reply 
of  one  of  the  directors  of  public  works  to  a  councilman,  who  said  to  him 
at  the  time  when  the  works  passed  under  the  control  of  the  department: 

"To  run  a  gas  works  you  need  a  competent  engineer.  I  stand  ready  to  bring  into 
councils  an  ordinance  to  pay  the  needed  salary  for  that  needed  engineer.  I  am 
willing  to  make  it  $12,000  or  $15,000  or  $20,000  a  year  for  a  competent  man,  because 
to  run  the  gas  works  of  this  city  requires  a  capable  man  and  he  has  to  be  paid  for 
his  services." 

The  story  goes  that  the  reply  that  the  councilman  received  from  that 
official  was: 

"I  cannot  permit  anyone  who  serves  under  me  to  get  a  bigger  salary  than  I  get." 

The  attitude  of  the  department  towards  consumers  was  both  parsi- 
monious and  tyrannical.  They  were  obliged  to  pay  for  service  connec- 
tions in  excess  of  16  feet ;  they  were  charged  for  meter  cocks ;  they  were 
obliged  to  employ  a  plumber  to  connect  the  meter  with  the  inside  piping; 
they  were  held  liable  for  damage  to  the  meter  by  fire  or  other  causes; 
and  to  cap  the  climax  a  new  tenant  or  owner  had  to  pay  the  unpaid  bills 
of  his  predecessor  before  the  gas  would  be  turned  on.  Yet  in  spite  of 
these  schemes  to  increase  the  nominal  price  of  gas  the  average  annual 
loss  during  the  last  four  years  of  municipal  operation  was  $239,654 — 
with  no  adequate  allowance  for  maintenance,  much  less  depreciation. 

When,  in  1897,  a  proposition  was  made  to  lease  the  plant  to  a  com- 
pany the  Philadelphia  Ledger  advocated  the  change  in  an  editorial  from 
which  the  following  extract  is  taken: 

"The  city  by  leasing  the  works  would  get  rid  of  the  most  corrupting  force  in 
municipal  politics — a  force  which  has  cost  the  city  untold  millions  in  indirect  ways. 
The  works  have  been  run  down  and  mismanaged  to  such  an  extent  that  it  seems  to  be 
impossible  for  the  city  to  redeem  them,  especially  if  they  should  be  left  in  the  control 
of  the  men  whom  it  has  thus  far  been  impossible  to  dislodge,  and  who  run  the  works 


48  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting   Plants 

as  a  great  political  machine,  not  as  a  manufacturing  plant.  To  get  rid  of  this  venal 
and  corrupt  political  machine  would  be  to  take  a  long  step  toward  good  municipal 
government,  as  it  would  be  to  destroy  the  strongest  and  most  dangerous  of  all  the 
political  jobbers'  strongholds.  The  city  has  to  choose  between  running  its  gas 
works  at  a  loss,  the  while  furnishing  a  bad  quality  of  gas,  or  making  a  lease  which 
shall  provide  it  with  an  annual  revenue  from  the  sale  of  good  up-to-standard  gas." 

In  December  of  that  year  the  plant  was  taken  over  on  lease  by  the 
United  Gas  Improvement  Company.  All  the  vexatious  regulations  men- 
tioned above  were  promptly  done  away  with,  the  candle-power  of  the  ga? 
was  increased  from  19.17  to  an  average  of  22.95  (although  the  contract 
only  prescribed  22),  and  steps  were  immediately  taken  to  put  the  plant 
in  first-class  condition,  more  than  twelve  millions  having  been  expended 
on  betterments  during  the  first  nine  years  of  private  operation.  At  the 
same  time  the  wages  of  employes  were  increased  and  their  hours  of  work 
reduced  from  twelve  to  eight. 

During  the  years  immediately  preceding  the  lease  the  average  annual 
loss  on  the  plant  is  estimated  at  from  $240,000  to  $400,000.  Although 
the  price  of  gas  remained  the  same  after  the  lease,  during  the  first  nine 
years  of  private  operation  the  average  annual  income  to  the  city  was  in 
the  neighborhood  of  $2,500,000,  a  difference  of  at  least  $2,750,000  in 
favor  of  private  management. 

In  1904,  Chas.  F.  Warwick,  who,  as  mayor  of  Philadelphia,  signed 
the  lease,  thus  expressed  himself  in  regard  to  it: 

"Municipal  control  of  the  gas  works  subjects  them  always  to  political  influence, 
and  to  these  influences  may  be  attributed  the  failure  to  improve  the  works  and  to 
furnish  a  good  quality  of  gas.  The  Philadelphia  gas  works  were  under  the  control 
of  a  trusteeship,  which,  in  time,  became  a  great  political  power.  Upon  the  abolition 
of  the  trust,  the  city  undertook  to  manage  the  business,  but  without  much  success. 
" --pry  year  councils  were  appealed  to  for  appropriations  for  necessary  and  perma- 
nent improvements.  There  never  was  enough  profit  from  the  operation  of  the 
works  to  make  the  needed  change,  and  consequently  the  plant  deteriorated 
and  failed  to  meet  the  requirements  because  it  was  impossible  to  conduct  it  upon 
strictly  business  principles. 

"Until  municipalities  are  removed  absolutely  from  political  control,  and 
until  they  are  looked  upon  as  business  corporations,  conducted  upon  purely 
•  ^siness  principles,  irrespective  of  political  patronage,  I  believe  that  private 
management  of  municipal  works  is  to  the  advantage  of  the  community." 

About  the  same  time  John  Weaver,  who  was  then  mayor,  gave  the 
following  opinion  in  a  signed  interview : 

"We  have  now  in  Philadelphia  excellent  gas  service  which  we  could  not 
have  hoped  to  get  under  the  old  system  of  trusteeship  of  the  gas  works  with- 
out an  enormous  outlay  of  money,  which,  of  course,  the  tax-payers  could  not 
afford.  What  Philadelphia  suffered  under  the  old  system  would  not  be  tol- 
erated by  an  American  community  today.  The  management  of  the  gas  works 
was  for  many  years  a  serious  trouble  for  the  city  and  was  the  cause  of  con- 
siderable political  strife  and  feeling.  The  lease  of  the  works  to  a  private 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  49 

corporation  was  a  happy  outcome  of  the  distressing  condition,  and  I  am  con- 
vinced that  if  a  careful  canvass  was  made  of  our  tax-payers  you  would  not 
find  a  handful  who  would  be  willing  to  go  back  to  the  old  order  of  things." 

Under  the  terms  of  the  lease  the  city  reserved  to  itself  the  right  to 
terminate  the  lease  at  the  expiration  of  ten  years  by  giving  six  months' 
notice  of  its  intention  to  do  so.  As  the  time  when  this  notice  must  be 
given  approached,  a  committee  of  councils  was  appointed  to  investigate 
the  subject.  This  committee,  after  a  series  of  public  hearings,  during 
which  full  opportunity  was  given  for  argument  in  opposition  to  a  con- 
tinuance of  the  lease,  reported  adversely  to  a  discontinuance,  the  report 
being  sustained  by  votes  of  54  to  22  in  the  common  council  and  33  to  8 
in  the  select  council.  This  means  that  Philadelphia,  having  tried  munici- 
pal operation  for  60  years  and  private  operation  for  10  years,  is  firmly 
convinced  that  the  results  of  the  latter  are  in  all  respects  more  satisfac- 
tory than  could  be  expected  from  the  former. 

PITTSFIELD,  ILL. — Five  years  ago  the  mayor  gave  the  following  reason 
for  the  sale  of  the  electric  plant : 

"Cheaper  to  pay  the  Pittsfield  Electric  Co.  than  to  do  it  ourselves.  We  ran 
it  ourselves  for  several  years,  and  have  had  it  run  by  contract  at  least  five  years, 
saving  money  by  contracting  it  to  outsiders." 

PONTOTOC,  Miss. — In  1905  the  town  purchased  the  local  electric  plant 
for  $8,000.  Two  years  later  it  sold  it  for  $5,000,  because,  as  the  mayor 
wrote,  it  "didn't  pay  expenses."  Another  citizen  writes  that  the  sale  was 
due  to  "dissatisfaction  with  municipal  management." 

POPLARVILLE,  Miss. — The  citizens  voted,  in  1912,  to  lease  the  electric 
light  and  water  plant  for  one  year,  with  a  five-year  option.  Under  the 
terms  of  the  contract  the  lessee  is  to  pay  the  town  $2,000  per  year,  and  to 
furnish  street-lamps  free  of  charge. 

This  plant  has  been  unprofitably  operated  under  municipal  control 
ever  since  its  installation  some  five  or  six  years  ago. 

PORT  ANGELIS,*  WASH. — The  city  clerk  writes  under  date  of  October 
2,1912: 

"We  have  recently  contracted  with  the  Olympia  Power  Company  to  supply  cur- 
rent for  our  municipal  lighting  system." 

This  plant  represents  an  investment  of  $40,000. 

PORTSMOUTH,  OHIO— This  city  was  among  the  first  to  install  its  own 
electric  light  plant,  which  it  operated  until  a  street  railway  system  was 
installed.  At  that  time  a  contract  was  made  with  the  street  railway  com- 
pany by  the  terms  of  which  it  took  charge  of  the  lighting  plant  and 


50  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting   Plants 

furnished  light  to  the  city  for  a  specified  sum.  This  contract  continued  in 
force  until  about  three  years  ago,  when  the  practically  worn-out  and  out- 
of-date  equipment  was  sold  to  the  street  railway  company  because  the  city 
was  unwilling  to  expend  the  money  necessary  properly  to  reequip  the 
plant. 

PRINCEVILLE,  ILL. — The  mayor  writes  under  date  of  August  1,  1912 : 

"Our  lighting  plant  was  installed  eight  years  ago  at  a  cost  of  $5,000.    We  had  a 

30  h.  p.  gasoline  engine,  and  paid  $50  a  month  for  a  man  to  run  it.    The  engine  was 

out  of  business  about  two-thirds  of  the  time,  and  we  were  at  constant  expense  for 

repairs. 

"About  a  year  ago  we  sold  the  plant  to  E.  L.  Brown  of  Elmwood  for  $3,000.  Our 
reason  for  making  the  change  was  because  we  found  that  we  could  buy  our  lighting 
for  less  money  and  get  continuous  service." 

PULASKI,  VA. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant  was  sold  on  April 
1,  1911,  to  a  private  company.  The  mayor  says : 

"The  plant  cost  originally  $12,500,  and  after  11  years'  service  was  worth  about 
half  this  sum  with  nothing  saved  to  renew.  Hence  our  loss  was  about  $6,000. 

PULLMAN,  WASH. — The  electric  distributing  plant,  installed  at  a  cost 
of  $15,000,  was  sold  in  1907  for  $6,000.  This  was  authorized  by  the 
voters  on  the  recommendation  of  the  city  council,  which  adopted  a  resolu- 
tion giving  the  reason  for  its  action  as  follows : 

"The  electric  light  plant  owned  by  the  city  of  Pullman  has  proven  to  be  a  burden 
to  the  taxpayers  of  the  city,  and  the  same  cannot  be  operated  by  such  city  so  as 
to  repay  the  cost  and  expense  of  operation  and  interest  on  the  capital  invested 
therein  and  the  necessary  depreciation  thereof,  and  the  same  is  now  and  threatens 
to  become  a  still  greater  and  more  burdensome  charge  on  the  taxpayers  of  this 
city." 

In  1908  the  city  clerk  wrote  that  a  twenty-year  contract  had  been 
made,  which  involved  a  large  saving  to  the  city. 

RICHMOND,  MICH. — At  a  special  election  held  on  September  16,  1912, 
the  proposition  to  sell  the  municipal  electric  lighting  plant  to  a  private 
company  was  carried.  This  plant  had  been  in  operation  since  1900. 

Before  considering  the  company's  proposition,  the  council  decided  to 
employ  Wreakes  and  Noyes,  electrical  engineers,  of  Detroit,  to  make  a 
thorough  investigation  of  the  condition  of  the  plant.  The  following 
extracts  are  quoted  from  the  engineers'  reports : 

"In  common  with  almost  all  municipal  plants,  the  early  records  are  more  or  less 
shrouded  in  mystery.  In  fact,  the  early  accounts  are  simply  a  record  of  receipts  and 
expenditures,  and  to  complicate  matters  still  further,  the  expenditures  usually  show 
only  the  name  of  the  party  to  whom  the  individual  order  was  drawn,  with  absolutely 
no  indication  of  the  purpose  of  the  payment.  Money  spent  for  improvements,  in- 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  51 

creased  capacity  and  betterments — charges  against  the  capital  account — have  prob- 
ably been  paid  and  charged  to  expenses.  Then  it  has  been  found  impossible  to  accu- 
rately determine  how  much  is  invested  in  the  present  plant,  and  to  separate  the 
actual  operating  expenses.  The  customary  station  records  are  conspicuous  by  their 
absence.  There  is  no  station  log,  and  no  totalizing  meters  upon  either  water  or 
electric  end ;  therefore,  no  record  of  station  output  or  hours  of  operation.  For  these 
reasons  it  was  considered  inadvisable  to  attempt  an  analysis  of  the  earlier  operations 
of  the  plant,  as  owing  to  the  absence  of  even  the  simplest  records,  so  much  data 
would  have  to  be  estimated  that  the  analysis  would  be  of  but  little  value. 

"We  consider  that  the  plant  as  at  present  operated  is  not  self-supporting,  but  is  a 
source  of  direct  expense  to  the  village  and  is  sustained  by  funds  appropriated  from 
the  general  taxes.  This  method  of  operation  is  an  injustice  to  those  taxpayers  who 
do  not  use  the  plant's  product,  but  must  contribute  to  its  support. 

"Further,  there  is  some  $16,000  of  the  taxpayers'  money  invested  in  the  plant,  the 
operation  of  which  just  pays  expenses.  The  same  $16,000  properly  invested  would 
bring  the  village  an  unincumbered  income  of  six  or  seven  hundred  dollars  a  year." 

At  the  same  time  a  similar  offer  from  the  private  company  was  re- 
jected by  the  neighboring  town  of  New  Baltimore.  The  New  Baltimore 
Era  laments  the  lost  opportunity  as  follows : 

"Richmond  has  accepted  their  proposition  and  the  people  there  will  enjoy  twenty- 
four  hour  service  at  lower  rates  than  before,  and  the  tax  rate  will  be  reduced.  New 
Baltimore  refused  to  investigate,  and  our  people  are  still  in  the  dark  after  midnight, 
and  the  tax  rate  has  not  been  reduced,  and  possibly  has  been  increased." 

ROCKVILLE,  MD. — The  electric  light  plant,  installed  in  1902,  was  de- 
stroyed by  fire  about  1904  and  has  not  been  rebuilt.  According  to  the 
town  clerk: 

"The  loss  was  total;  no  insurance;  it  was  estimated  at  not  less  than  $10,000." 

ROMEO,  MICH. — The  municipal  electric  plant  was  found  to  be  operating 
at  large  financial  loss.  It  has,  therefore,  been  sold  to  the  Eastern  Michi- 
gan Edison  Company.  The  plant  was  ably  and  cleanly  managed,  but  the 
city  authorities  found  it  impossible  to  compete  with  private  service.  The 
abandonment  of  the  plant  under  these  conditions  reflects  a  large  measure 
of  credit  upon  the  administration,  in  thus  eliminating  this  element  of 
continuous  waste. 

ST.  CHARLES,*  Mo. — The  municipal  lighting  plant,  installed  at  a  cost 
of  $19,000,  was  discarded  in  the  spring  of  1913,  when  a  contract  was 
made  with  the  American  Light  and  Power  Company  to  furnish  electricity. 
The  editor  of  the  Banner-News  writes : 

"By  handing  over  our  lighting  plant  we  secured  the  opportunity  of  being  con- 
nected with  the  hydro-electric  energy  of  the  Keokuk  dam,  and  thus  we  are  better 
able  to  offer  inducements  to  factories  and  develop  our  community  commercially. 
Our  commercial  plant  was  never  on  the  basis  of  municipal  ownership,  only  our 
street  lighting  system,  therefore  we  derived  no  income  from  it,  and  the  expense  of 
up-keep  was  borne  directly  by  taxatioa.  We  were  twenty  years  behind  the  time 


52  Defunct   Municipal  Lighting   Plants 

in  methods,  and  the  private  company  showed  us  that  they  could  put  in  a  better 
lighting  system  than  we  had,  at  less  expense.  They  also  held  out  the  advantages 
of  being  able  to  offer  cheap  power,  and  this  appealed  to  our  Commercial  Club. 

SANDWICH,  ILL. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant,  which  began 
operation  in  1892,  has  been  purchased  recently  by  a  private  company. 
The  Sandwich  Free  Press  contains  the  following  comment  on  the  sale : 

"The  council  has  had  this  matter  under  serious  consideration  and  investigation 
for  over  18  months,  and  the  action  taken  was  unanimous.  The  pole  lines  are,  and 
have  been  for  years,  in  very  bad  condition.  The  majority  of  the  poles  have  outlived 
their  time  and  are  rotten  and  dangerous.  The  wiring,  never  good,  is  in  very  bad 
shape,  and  the  current  is  transmitted  at  a  great  loss  of  energy  and  high  cost  for 
fuel. 

"On  the  other  hand  the  demand  for  service  is  constantly  increasing.  There  is  a 
general  demand  for  a  24-hour  service.  A  city  of  this  size  should  have  that  con- 
venience. There  is  need  for  electric  current  for  power  for  our  factories  and  many 
smaller  institutions.  This  is  the  situation  that  has  confronted  the  council  for 
months.  Fortunately  the  way  out  of  the  dilemma  opens  in  the  opportune  appear- 
ance of  the  private  company. 

"All  told,  the  council  believes  the  change  will  result  in  better  lighting  and  water 
service  for  the  city  at  an  annual  saving  of  at  least  $2,000,  and  at  the  same  time  the 
citizens  will  be  provided  with  first-class  light  and  power  service,  which  at  present 
is  impossible.  There  will  be  the  further  benefit  of  relieving  the  city  of  the  casualty 
liability,  which  is  no  small  item,  and  in  addition  the  council  will  be  relieved  of  the 
burden  of  managing  the  plant  and  of  the  loss  and  dissatisfaction  occasioned  by 
changes  in  management  from  year  to  year." 

SANTA  CLARA,*  CAL. — An  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in  1896 
at  a  cost  of  $15,000.  The  generating  plant  has  been  shut  down  as,  accord- 
ing to  the  president  of  the  board  of  trustees,  it  was  found  to  be  more 
economical  to  purchase  the  current. 

SAVANNAH,  Mo. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant  was  installed  in 
1892  at  a  cost  of  $12,000.  The  mayor  writes  as  follows,  under  date  of 
May  29th,  1913  : 

"Municipal  operation  of  our  lighting  plant  was  discontinued  something  like 
two  years  ago,  mainly  because  our  old  plant  was  getting  to  be  pretty  badly  worn 
and  the  service  unsatisfactory.  At  the  time  of  discontinuing  the  local  plant  it  was 
a  heavy  money  loser,  though  when  new  and  in  perfect  running  order  it  paid  its 
way.  It  was  decided  by  popular  vote  to  discontinue  the  local  plant  and  have  our 
current  and  power  furnished  from  St.  Joseph,  about  fourteen  miles  distant.  So  far 
this  experiment  has  proved  quite  satisfactory.  Our  town  no  longer  owns  the  plant." 

SHAKOPEE,*  MINN. — In  September,  1912,  the  city  of  Shakopee  closed 
a  contract  with  a  private  company  to  furnish  current  for  the  municipal 
electric  plant,  which  had  been  in  operation  since  1902.  The  city  finds 
that  it  can  buy  current  cheaper  than  it  can  make  it. 

SHELBY,  MICH.— The  village  president  writes  that  the  municipal  light- 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  63 

ing  plant  installed  in  1895  at  a  cost  of  $6,000  has  been  closed  down  and 
that  lighting  is  being  furnished  by  outside  power. 

SHEPHARD,*  MICH. — While  a  municipal  electric  lighting  plant  was  in- 
stalled about  four  years  ago,  Shephard  is  now  being  furnished  with  elec- 
tricity by  a  private  company.  The  village  president  writes : 

"Our  plant  is  closed  down  owing  to  no  taxes  being  levied  with  which  to  defray 
a  portion  of  the  expense.  Under  ordinary  conditions  the  installment  which  we 
have  here  would  pay  out,  provided  all  currents  of  electricity  consumed  were  ac- 
counted for  and  none  given  away." 

SHEPHERDSTOWN,  W.  VA. — When  this  plant  was  sold  in  October,  1907, 
a  thirty-year  franchise  was  given  to  the  purchasers.  In  December,  1907, 
the  mayor  wrote  as  follows : 

"The  town  electric  plant  was  sold  about  two  months  ago.  It  was  installed  in 
1901  at  a  cost  of  $4,800,  and  sold  for  $3,200.  Reasons  for  selling  were  that  no  fund 
was  accumulated  for  depreciation,  and  the  town  could  not  afford  to  pay  for  its 
proper  superintendence,  and  almost  every  year  there  was  a  change  of  officials.  The 
rates  were  too  low;  the  change  has  resulted  in  a  meter  system.  Flat  rates  are  not 
a  success.  The  old  prices  allowed  for  no  depreciation,  and  repairs  were  urgently 
needed." 

SHERIDAN,  IND. — The  municipal  electric  plant,  installed  in  1898,  was 
sold  in  1911  to  J.  L.  Vickery,  the  purchaser  agreeing  to  assume  the 
bonded  indebtedness  of  $9,500  and  current  interest.  The  total  cost  of  the 
plant  was  about  $16,000.  The  town  clerk  writes: 

"In  our  case  municipal  ownership  was  a  failure.  We  started  in  with  fifteen  cents 
per  month  flat,  for  16  C.P.  No  provision  was  made  for  street  lighting,  which  made 
an  extra  expense. 

"The  plant  was  originally  installed  with  steam  power ;  later  a  gas  producer  engine 
was  put  in  and  that  broke  the  camel's  back." 

SHICKSHINNY,  PA. — The  electric  light  plant  installed  in  1904,  at  a 
cost  of  $10,500,  was  sold  in  1911  to  a  private  company.  The  editor  of 
the  local  paper  writes  that  the  people  became  more  and  more  dissatisfied 
with  the  poor  service  furnished  by  the  municipality,  due  in  a  large  meas- 
ure to  change  of  councilmen  and  the  fact  that  in  most  cases  "nobody  was 
on  the  job." 

One  of  the  chief  arguments  in  favor  of  the  sale  was  the  fact  that  there 
was  a  large  and  pressing  demand  from  the  citizens  for  the  establishment  of 
a  24-hour  service.  The  sale  of  the  plant  saved  the  municipality  a  large 
expenditure  for  the  installation  of  a  duplicate  plant,  one  large  enough 
to  enable  them  to  offer  power  in  sufficient  quantities  to  manufacturing 
concerns  desiring  to  locate  in  the  town. 


6i  Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants 

Sioux  FALLS,*  S.  D. — The  city  installed  an  electric  light  plant  in  1901 
at  a  cost  of  $75,000.  The  city  auditor  wrote,  in  1907 : 

"Generating  plant  shut  down  and  contract  for  current  let  to  private  company 
about  two  years  ago  this  fall.  Reasons :  bad  management  and  politics  made  cost  ot 
running  very  high.  Cost  per  light  could  never  be  figured  out  on  account  of  bad  book- 
keeping and  failure  to  separate  operation  and  construction." 

Sioux  RAPIDS,  IA. — After  twelve  years  of  unsuccessful  municipal 
operation,  the  electric  lighting  plant  at  Sioux  Rapids  was  sold  to  private 
owners  in  1910.  The  town  clerk  writes : 

"  H  elp  was  high  and  did  not  give  the  best  attention  to  the  machinery,  and  the  plant 
did  not  prove  a  paying  proposition." 

SOMERSET,  KY. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant,  installed  in  1903 
at  a  cost  of  $18,000,  was  sold  to  a  private  company  after  being  in  opera- 
tion about  two  years. 

SOUDERTON,*  PA. — This  borough  closed  down  its  generating  plant  and 
made  a  contract  for  current.  The  chief  burgess  wrote  that  the  reasons 
for  this  were  the  high  cost  of  operating  the  plant,  trouble  with  engineers 
and  superintendent,  and  the  fact  that  the  plant  was  too  small  for  the 
load.  Only  a  short  time  before  the  plant  had  been  enlarged,  but  evidently 
without  sufficient  foresight.  The  change  was  heartily  endorsed  by  the 
citizens,  one  of  whom  said  that  the  chief  trouble  was  that  "everybody 
in  power  wanted  to  monkey  with  the  plant." 

SOUTH  LYON,  MICH. — This  plant,  installed  at  a  cost  of  $5,000,  was 
sold  in  1912.  The  village  president  writes : 

"We  have  sold  our  South  Lyon  municipal  lighting  plant  to  the  Eastern  Michigan 
Edison  Company,  and  every  one  here  seems  to  be  perfectly  satisfied  with  the  sale. 
Our  municipal  plant  was  a  failure." 

SOUTH  PITTSBURG,  TENN. — In  December,  1905,  the  city  purchased  for 
$3,000  the  electric  plant  on  which  $9,500  had  been  expended.  In  No- 
vember, 1907,  the  city  resold  the  plant,  taking  its  pay  in  lighting.  A  dis- 
interested citizen  writes  as  follows : 

"After  about  two  years'  operation  of  the  plant  by  the  city  it  was  demonstrated 
that  the  project  was  not  paying,  and  in  fact  the  actual  expense  of  operation  could 
not  be  met — hence  the  main  reason  for  selling;  and,  too,  the  plant  was  in  very  poor 
condition  even  after  the  city  had  expended  about  $1,000  for  repairs,  and  no  more 
money  could  be  raised  by  the  corporation  for  additional  repairs." 

SPIRIT  LAKE,  IOWA — The  municipal  lighting  plant  was  sold  to  private 
owners  in  December,  1909. 

The  mayor  writes  that  the  plant  "would  not  entirely  carry  itself" ;  and 
the  town  clerk  says:  "The  opinion  of  a  majority  of  the  citizens  is 
against  municipal  ownership." 


Defunct    Municipal    Lighting    Plants  55 

An  interesting  feature  is  that,  as  the  plant  was  presented  to  the  city, 
there  was  no  interest  or  sinking  fund  charge;  but  in  spite  of  that,  it  did 
not  pay  expenses. 

STATESVILLE,  N.  C. — The  municipal  electric  light  plant,  established  in 
1887,  has  been  buying  power  from  a  private  company  for  several  years. 
The  editor  of  the  Statesville  Landmark  writes  as  follows: 

"The  old  steam  plant  was  not  a  paying  proposition.  Properly  equipped,  and 
operated  in  a  business-like  manner,  it  would  have  paid;  but  the  great  trouble  with 
municipal  ownership  of  any  sort  is  to  get  it  operated  in  a  business  way,  as  a  private 
business  is  operated.  The  community  is  disposed  to  demand  concessions  that  it 
would  not  expect  from  private  ownership;  and  as  they  feel  that  they  own  the  plant 
you  can  see  how  readily  rates  are  run  down  to  a  non-profit  basis.  The  old  plant 
produced  a  small  surplus  of  revenue  after  running  expenses  were  paid,  but  not 
sufficient  to  pay  interest  on  the  bonds  and  to  pay  for  the  depreciation.  I  do  not 
know  the  exact  amount  of  net  loss." 

SUMMITVILLE,  IND. — In  regard  to  the  sale,  in  1911,  of  the  municipal 
electric  light  and  water  plant,  the  town  clerk  writes: 

"It  is  true  that  municipal  ownership  proved  a  losing  venture  in  this  town,  and, 
after  trying  for  several  years  to  make  it  self  supporting,  the  plant  was  sold  to  private 
parties." 

SYCAMORE,  ILL. — Said  to  have  found  that  lights  cost  more  under 
public  than  under  private  ownership,  and  that  the  cost  was  increasing 
each  year. 

TAWAS  CITY,  MICH. — The  electric  plant  formerly  owned  by  the  city 
is  now  in  private  hands.  No  information  is  obtainable  from  city  officials. 

TIFFIN,  OHIO. — A  reliable  correspondent  writes  in  regard  to  the  mu- 
nicipal gas  plant: 

"This  property,  formerly  a  city  plant,  was  taken  over  by  the  Kerlin  Brothers  of 
Toledo,  Ohio,  after  April  1,  1905,  and  is  still  operated  by  the  above-named  parties 
under  the  name  of  the  Montpelier  Light  &  Water  Company,  Montpelier,  Indiana. 

"Some  years  ago,  possibly  fifteen,  the  city  of  Tiffin  issued  bonds  to  the  amount  of 
$500,000  for  the  purpose  of  furnishing  natural  gas  to  the  above-named  city  and  did 
furnish  gas  for  some  time,  and  under  these  conditions,  however,  it  was  not  a  success, 
and  the  piping,  wells,  leases  and  other  property  were  sold  a  few  years  later  at  a  very 
low  figure.  To  the  best  of  my  knowledge  the  city  is  still  paying  interest  on  about 
$300,000  of  this  original  debt,  for  which  they  have  nothing  to  show,  as  they  do  not 
own  or  operate  any  municipal  utilities  at  the  present  time." 

Although  some  eight  years  have  elapsed  since  the  city  of  Tiffin,  Ohio, 
let  go  of  its  municipal  gas  undertaking,  the  memory  of  that  experiment  is 
still  green  in  the  minds  of  the  taxpayers.  The  following  editorial  from  the 
Advertiser  may  be  taken  as  an  illustration  of  the  eternal  truth  of  the  old 
saying  that  a  singed  cat  dreads  the  fire. 

NEVER   AGAIN! 

"The  city  of  Tiffin  is  face  to  face  with  the  serious  proposition  of  losing  the  re- 


56  Defunct   Municipal   Lighting   Plants 

mainder  of  its  street  car  system  and  already  means  and  methods  of  averting  such 
a  misfortune  are  being  advanced.  Among  these  is  the  proposition  of  municipal 
ownership.  That  such  a  plan  will  find  favor  with  even  a  small  portion  of  the  people 
is  doubted.  Tiffin  has  had  her  lesson  in  municipal  ownership  and  her  taxpayers 
will  see  to  it  that  she  keeps  out  of  it  in  the  future.  The  taking  over  of  the  city 
lines  by  the  city  would  not  even  be  an  experiment.  It  would  be  the  deliberate 
taking  hold  of  a  business  which  20  years  of  experience  has  proven  beyond  a  doubt 
to  be  a  money  losing  proposition  when  operated  by  a  private  corporation.  If  the 
presejnt  owner  cannot  operate  the  line  at  a  profit,  or  even  at  actual  cost  of  running 
expenses,  even  when  run  as  an  accessory  to  the  Tiffin,  Fostoria  and  Eastern  inter- 
urban  line,  how  then,  in  the  name  of  common  sense,  would  the  city  be  able  to  do 
even  as  well  with  the  greatly  increased  operating  expenses! 

"In  the  present  conditions  it  is  of  great  importance  that  the  communications  with 
the  factories  and  Riverview  park  be  maintained  for  the  convenience  of  the  factory 
employees  and  for  the  retention  of  the  park  as  a  free  pleasure  resort.  But  they 
are  not  so  important  that  the  city  should  leap  into  the  abyss  of  municipal  owner- 
ship. Such  a  policy,  just  at  the  time  when  the  city  is  recovering  its  financial  feet 
after  the  municipal  gas  plant  experiment  would  be  suicidal.  Rather  let  us  take 
steps  to  squelch  that  irresponsible  class  of  agitators  who  have  taken  their  grievances, 
either  real  or  fancied,  before  the  public  utilities  commission,  even  though  it  was 
done  on  official  advice;  then  let  our  city  authorities  endeavor  to  the  best  of  their 
ability  to  undo  the  work  they  have  done,  by  granting  the  company  a  fair  and  rea- 
sonable franchise  and  making  the  conditions  under  which  the  road  must  be  operated 
so  lenient  that  the  company  will  be  willing  to  at  least  continue  service." 

TIPTON,  IOWA — In  response  to  enquiries  concerning  the  history  of  the 
municipal  electric  plant  the  following  graphic  picture  of  municipal  opera- 
tion has  been  received: 

"Our  municipal  plant  was  run  with  varying  success,  controlled  entirely  by  politics. 
The  engineer  and  fireman  were  selected  with  reference  to  being  democrats  or  re- 
publicans. It  drifted  along  until  some  time  in  1893.  It  is  reported  that  the  fireman, 
instead  of  wheeling  out  the  ashes,  would  throw  them  out  of  the  window  and  they 
would  pile  up  against  the  building.  It  would  frequently  get  afire,  but,  as  he  was 
there,  he  could  take  the  hose  and  put  it  out.  One  night  it  got  afire  when  he  was  not 
present  and  the  whole  works  burned.  There  was  no  insurance.  Each  member  of 
the  council,  the  morning  after  the  fire,  found  fault  with  the  other  one  for  the 
reason  that  he  thought  the  other  one  had  had  it  insured.  The  city  did  not  have 
the  money  to  rebuild  and  reequip.  The  city  thereupon  granted  a  franchise  to  a  num- 
ber of  citizens,  who  organized  a  private  corporation,  and  the  undertaking  ever 
since  has  been  controlled  by  a  private  company." 

TOLEDO,  OHIO — Although  the  natural  gas  plant  installed  by  this  city 
in  1895  was  primarily  for  fuel  purposes,  the  gas  being  used  to  only  a 
slight  extent  for  lighting,  this  list  would  not  be  complete  without  some 
account  of  it. 

The  original  cost,  $1,500,000,  was  met  by  this  issue  of  4^  per  cent 
bonds,  $1,050,000  of  which  are  still  unpaid.  The  business  was  unsuc- 
cessful from  the  start,  and  the  very  men  who  had  advocated  the  under- 
taking and  made  their  private  profit  from  it  soon  advised  that  it  be  sold. 


Defunct   Municipal   Lighting   Plants  57 

As  its  gas  field  became  exhausted  the  city  tried  to  secure  a  new  supply, 
but  its  efforts  were  frustrated  by  the  fact  that  it  had  to  advertise  its  in- 
tention for  sixty  days,  giving  others  a  chance  to  get  in  before  it. 

Finally  the  main  part  of  the  plant  was  leased  and  in  1903  the  lines 
and  mains  outside  the  city  were  sold  for  $102,000,  of  which  $27,000  was 
protested  by  the  purchasers  on  the  ground  that  several  miles  of  pipe 
included  in  the  sale  were  not  delivered,  having  previously  been  stolen 
from  the  city.  It  is  impossible  to  tell  how  much  the  city  will  ultimately 
lose  by  this  experiment,  but  it  will  be  undoubtedly  in  excess  of  $1,000,000. 

A  request  to  Mayor  Whitlock  for  information  elicited  a  reply  from 
his  secretary  which  gave  no  hint  that  a  loss  had  been  incurred  except  the 
following : 

"However,  the  experiment  was  of  much  greater  benefit  to  the  city  than  the  figures 
show,  for  this  reason :  the  consumers  of  natural  gas  in  Toledo  have  been  given  a 
lower  rate  than  any  other  city  in  the  country,  with  perhaps  one  or  two  exceptions, 
for  practically  the  last  fifteen  years.  The  low  rate  was  brought  about  by  the  com- 
petition that  began  when  the  city  entered  the  field." 

If  this  were  true  it  might  be  an  adequate  offset  to  the  loss  on  the 
plant;  but  unfortunately  the  facts  do  not  bear  out  the  statement.  The 
1907  edition  of  Brown's  "Directory  of  American  Gas  Companies"  gives 
more  than  100  cities  and  towns  in  Ohio  alone  where  the  rate  for  natural 
gas  is  lower  than  in  Toledo,  as  would  naturally  be  the  case,  since  the 
gas  sold  in  Toledo  is  piped  from  the  furthermost  part  of  the  state.  This 
is  a  good  example  of  the  sort  of  "information"  which  is  given  out  by  city 
officials  who  are  in  favor  of  municipal  ownership  for  political  or  other 
reasons. 

TORONTO  JUNCTION,*  ONT. — This  electric  plant  was  installed  in  1890 
at  a  cost  of  $24,000.  In  1902  the  generating  plant  was  shut  down,  and  a 
contract  was  made  for  current. 

TOWNSEND,  MONT. — Only  one  opposition  ballot  was  cast  when,  in  1912, 
the  citizens  voted  to  accept  the  offer  of  the  Butte  Electric  Power  Com- 
pany to  light  the  city  for  a  term  of  fifteen  years.  The  town  is  said  to 
have  indulged  in  an  impromptu  Fourth  of  July  celebration  when  the  result 
of  the  election  was  announced.  The  mayor  writes : 

"The  cause  of  the  failure  of  the  municipal  light  plant,  in  my  judgment,  was  that 
the  town  being  small,  the  receipts  from  the  used  electricity  would  not  cover  ex- 
penses. The  cost  of  running  the  steam  plant  was  very  high.  The  town  lost  about 
$12,000  in  eight  years." 

TRENTON,  MICH. — By  a  vote  of  142  to  18  this  village  decided  in  1907 
to  sell  for  $8,000  the  electric  light  plant  installed  in  1902  and  the  water 
works  (except  the  distributing  system)  installed  in  1896.  The  original 


58  Defunct   Municipal   Lighting   Plants 

cost  of  the  latter  was  $8,000,  while  $16,000  had  been  expended  on  the 
former.  As  a  result  of  placing  these  plants  in  a  public  street  the  village 
had  been  engaged  in  litigation  for  five  years,  the  final  decision  being 
against  it. 

In  1905  the  building  was  destroyed  by  fire.  Although  it  was  insured 
and  rebuilt  the  plant  has  not  been  well  kept  up  since,  and  there  have 
been  the  usual  differences  between  the  council,  the  superintendent  and 
the  water  and  light  board,  finally  resulting  in  abolishing  the  board. 

An  investigation  by  the  council  disclosed  the  fact  that,  aside  from 
depreciation,  the  plant  was  losing  at  least  $500  a  year,  and  that  this  loss 
would  be  considerably  increased  if  they  undertook  to  give  the  24-hour 
service  desired  by  some  of  the  citizens.  Their  decision  was  unanimous, 
and  was  sustained  by  an  almost  unanimous  vote  of  the  qualified  electors. 

UKIAH,*  CAL. — The  electric  plant  was  installed  in  1899  at  a  cost  of 
$50,000.  The  generating  plant  was  shut  down  in  1908,  and  current  is 
purchased  from  a  private  company.  The  plant  was  run  at  a  heavy  loss. 

UNIVERSITY  PLACE,*  NEB.— The  generating  plant  of  the  electric  light 
works,  for  which  the  village  is  bonded  for  $15,000,  was  closed  down  in 
1908,  after  being  operated  only  three  years,  and  a  contract  for  current 
was  made  with  a  private  company. 

VANCOUVER,  WASH. — A  reliable  correspondent  furnished  the  following 
statement  in  1907 : 

"The  municipal  electric  light  plant  in  Vancouver  was  installed  about  October, 
1888.  The  total  cost  up  to  date  of  sale  was  approximately  $70,000,  although  an 
inventory  of  the  plant  never  showed  a  value  in  excess  of  $40,000.  The  difference 
was  probably  due  to  charging  expenses  to  plant  account,  or  there  may  have  been 
certain  amounts  of  money  charged  to  the  plant  for  which  the  plant  showed  no  in- 
vestm'ent.  The  plant  was  disposed  of  at  public  sale  June,  1902,  the  sale  price  being 
$11,000.  The  reason  for  the  sale  was  that  the  plant  was  losing  money,  and  the  terms 
of  the  franchise  granted  with  the  sale  limited  the  price  of  current  to  figures  below 
those  under  which  the  municipal  plant  could  deliver  current  profitably." 

Another  citizen  continues  the  history  of  the  plant  under  private  owner- 
ship : 

"The  purchaser,  whose  cash  investment  was  $5,000,  operated  and  extended  the 
plant  without  other  capital  than  was  available  from  the  earnings,  out  of  which  he 
and  two  brothers  took,  in  salaries,  sufficient  money  to  pay  their  living  expenses.  In 
December,  1905,  the  Portland  Railway  Light  and  Power  Company  purchased  the 
plant,  paying  $200,000,  and  the  net  earnings  on  this  investment  were  over  10  per 
cent.  I  consider  this  one  of  the  best  illustrations  of  the  inefficiency  of  operation  of 
municipally  owned  plants  that  has  come  within  my  observation." 

WABASH,  IND. — A  local  correspondent  writes  that  this  was  the  first 
city  in  the  world  to  be  lighted  by  electricity,  the  municipal  plant  having 


Defunct   Municipal   Lighting   Plants  59 

been  installed  in  1880,  at  a  cost,  it  is  said,  of  $18,000.    Five  years  later 
it  was  sold  at  a  considerable  loss. 

WADDINGTON,  N.  Y. — The  electric  plant  owned  by  this  village  was  sold 
after  the  voters  had  so  ordered  at  a  special  election.  The  president  of  the 
village  writes  briefly  but  eloquently : 

"The  property  was  sold  for  $3,000;  cost  $8,000;  5  years  used.  The  village  was 
sore  on  the  property." 

WADESBORO,  N.  C. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant,  installed  in 
1900,  has  been  sold  to  the  Yadkin  River  Power  Company,  to  which  com- 
pany a  ten-year  contract  has  been  given  to  light  the  town. 

A  majority  of  the  citizens  voted  in  the  recent  election  against  a  pro- 
posal to  enlarge  and  repair  the  old  lighting  plant,  preferring  to  accept 
the  company's  offer  rather  than  to  continue  municipal  operation,  of  which 
they  had  already  had  twelve  years'  experience.  The  mayor  gives  the 
following  reasons  for  the  failure  of  the  enterprise: 

"Incompetent  men  were  in  charge  of  the  plant  ,and  a  short-sighted  policy  was  pur- 
sued by  the  commissioners,  who  did  not  keep  abreast  of  the  needs  of  a  growing 
town.  Municipal  ownership  is  a  rank  failure  if  it  is  not  divorced  from  politics  or 
favorite  sons,  cousins,  nephews  and  uncles." 

WALKERTON,*  IND. — The  municipal  electric  lighting  plant  erected  at  a 
cost  of  $14,000  has  been  closed  down  and  arrangements  have  been  made 
by  the  city  council  to  have  the  Plymouth  Electric  Light  and  Power 
Company  furnish  current  to  operate  the  system.  The  editor  of  the 
Independent  writes  as  follows: 

"The  Walkerton  lighting  plant  has  been  operated  in  connection  with  the  water 
works  for  several  years,  and  the  surplus  over  the  amount  expended  for  maintenance 
has  been  counted  as  profit,  with  no  fund  laid  aside  for  repair,  rebuilding  or  de- 
preciation. The  day  of  reckoning  has  come.  With  a  dilapidated  plant,  engine  be- 
yond repair  and  dynamo  overworked,  there  is  not  money  enough  in  the  light 
treasury  to  buy  even  a  new  engine,  to  say  nothing  of  dynamo,  lines,  etc. 

"The  service  given  here  has  been  night  service  only,  without  motor  power.  On 
dark  days  the  merchants  have  been  compelled  to  resort  to  gasoline  lights,  and 
often  during  the  early  hours  of  the  evening  it  was  impossible  to  display  goods  to 
an  advantage  without  gasoline  lights.  One  season  during  the  holiday  rush  the 
lights  were  off  two  weeks,  and  last  fall  the  town  was  without  light  for  nearly  a 
like  stretch.  The  cry  has  always  been  that  the  town  could  not  afford  to  keep  two 
dynamos  for  emergency,  and  that  they  could  not  run  day  and  night  for  the  little 
consumption  during  the  day  time.  The  rate  is  the  same  as  is  charged  where  there 
are  first-class  services — both  light  and  motor. 

"It  would  not  pay  the  town  to  continue  at  the  cost  and  agony  of  her  merchants 
to  use  a  current  insufficient  for  her  comfort  and  convenience  for  the  simple  reason 
that  they  have  a.  municipal  plant,  when  the  outside  companies  offer  service 
at  such  a  low  rate. 

"Municipal   ownership  may  be  all  right  in  some  cases,  and  I  am  not  an  anti- 


60  Defunct   Municipal    Lighting   Plants 

municipal  ownership  howler,  but  in  the  case  at  hand  it  doesn't  fill  the  bill,  and  for 
one  I  am  glad  to  see  the  town  espouse  something  better.  I  have  suffered  incon- 
venience with  the  rest,  and  helped  pay  for  a  bubble  just  because  it  belonged  to  the 
town.  We  want  light — and  that  abundantly — day  and  night,  with  twenty-four  hour 
motor  privileges." 

WASHBURN,  Wis. — In  1907  this  city  purchased  the  local  electric  plant 
under  the  impression  that  it  could  give  its  citizens  more  satisfactory 
service  at  a  lower  cost.  After  operating  the  plant  for  ten  months  the  city 
discovered  its  mistake,  as  there  was  a  loss  instead  of  the  expected  profit. 
A  flaw  in  the  legal  procedure  was  opportunely  discovered,  and  the  plant 
was  returned  to  its  former  owners.  "Everybody  satisfied,"  is  the  way  a 
citizen  sums  up  the  result. 

WATERVILLE,*  WASH. — The  town  clerk  wrote  in  1908 : 

"We  are  not  operating  our  own  plant,  but  buy  the  power  from  the  Entiat  Power 
Company.  We  still  have  our  old  plant,  and  would  like  to  dispose  of  same  if  we 
can." 

Waterville  is  now  purchasing  current  from  the  Wenatchie  Valley  Gas 
and  Electric  Company. 

WEISER,*  IDAHO. — This  city  in  1903  installed  an  electric  plant  at 
cost  of  $20,000.    The  generating  plant  has  now  been  shut  down,  a  twenty- 
year  contract  for  current  having  been  made  with  a  company. 

WEST  NEWTON,  PA. — In  1910  the  municipal  lighting  plant,  installed 
in  1892,  at  a  cost  of  $32,000,  was  sold  for  $14,000  to  a  private  company. 
The  editor  of  the  West  Newton  Times-Sun  writes : 

"The  action  of  the  borough  officials  in  unloading  was  heartily  approved  by  the 
taxpayers,  for  the  institution  had  become  a  heavy  burden,  and  it  seemed  could  not 
be  made  self-supporting.  My  own  reason  for  this  failure  (and  the  same  opinion  is 
held  by  everyone  acquainted  with  conditions  here)  is  that  in  small  communities  it 
is  not  possible  to  get  public  officials  of  sufficient  business  ability  to  successfully 
manage  business  affairs  of  this  magnitude  and  character.  In  this  day  business  men 
will  not  neglect  their  own  business  to  take  care  of  the  affairs  of  the  municipality,  es- 
pecially since  there  is  no  remuneration  whatever.  I  cannot  figure  success  to 
municipal  ownership  of  public  utilities  in  small  towns,  or  in  fact  in  any  town  or 
city  where  public  officials  are  not  salaried. 

"We  have  excellent  service  for  all  purposes  day  and  night,  at  a  fair  rate,  and  the 
people  are  satisfied." 

WEST  TAMPA,  FLA. — The  city  of  West  Tampa,  finding  that  municipal 
lighting  was  a  failure,  sold  its  plant  to  the  Tampa  Electric  Company. 

WHEATON,  ILL. — The  electric  plant  was  installed  in  1890  at  a  cost  of 


a 


D  efunct   Municipal   Lighting  Pfantt    :/,*  •:  \ '-.  \  :>  /:<  61 

$18,000.    The  chairman  of  the  electric  light  committee  of  the  city  coun- 
cil furnished  the  following  details : 

"Replying  to  your  inquiry  I  have  to  advise  you  that  in  the  month  of  May,  1904. 
our  generating  plant  was  shut  down  and  the  purchase  of  current  from  the  Aurora, 
Elgin  &  Chicago  Railway  Company  commenced. 

'At  this  time  our  generating  plant  was  in  a  very  bad  condition  and  throughout 
required  immediate  replacement.  There  was  still  a  bonded  indebtedness  outstand- 
ing upon  the  city  on  account  of  this  plant  in  the  neighborhood  of  from  ten  to  twelve 
thousand  dollars.  The  city  also  had  additional  bonded  indebtedness  outstanding 
covering  other  improvements  to  such  an  extent  that  it  was  not  possible,  under  the 
statutes  of  this  state  to  raise  a  sufficient  sum  of  money  by  additional  bond  issues  to 
provide  for  the  renewal  of  our  generating  plant,  and  as  it  was  not  possible  to 
further  operate  our  plant  with  the  generating  part  thereof  in  the  condition  in  which 
it  was,  the  city  either  had  to  arrange  to  purchase  current  or  discontinue  the  supply- 
ing of  electricity  to  its  citizens;  or,  on  the  other  hand,  find  some  company  which 
would  accept  the  franchise  therefor.  At  that  time  this  was  not  possible,  so  the  only 
other  alternative  was  the  purchase  of  the  current,  which  was  done." 

This  plant  has  since  been  sold  to  a  private  company. 

WILLOUGHBY,  OHIO — The  town  has  recently  given  a  ten  years'  fran- 
chise to  a  private  company  to  supply  current  for  the  municipal  electric 
lighting  plant. 

It  has  been  stated  that  the  total  loss  to  Willoughby  through  municipal 
operation  is  more  than  $75,000. 

In  answer  to  a  letter  of  inquiry  on  the  subject,  the  mayor  writes  that 
"it  would  be  rather  a  tedious  matter  to  look  up  the  figures/'  but  "regrets 
to  state  that  municipal  ownership  has  been  a  failure." 

WILMINGTON,  OHIO — In  1907  the  mayor  wrote  in  regard  to  the  mu- 
nicipal electric  plant: 

"It  was  installed  in  1892 ;  cost  $40,000 ;  was  sold  February,  1903,  for  $12,000.  At 
time  of  sale  the  city  had  about  $110,000  invested  in  the  plant  up  to  that  time.  The 
company  purchasing  same  valued  the  franchise  much  more  highly  than  the  plant 
itself,  from  which  I  am  told  only  about  $4,000  was  realized.  The  reason  for  selling 
plant,  as  I  presume,  was  that  it  proved  a  failure  under  the  management  of  the  city 
authorities  notwithstanding  the  fact  that  those  in  charge  were  good  and  honest  men 
and  supposedly  competent  to  successfully  operate  the  same." 

Another  citizen  wrote  about  the  sime  time: 

"The  plant  was  a  complete  wreck  and  had  been  unable  to  furnish  lights  for 
streets  for  some  months  prior  to  sale,  and  only  occasionally  for  commercial  use. 
The  people  refused  to  vote  additional  funds,  or  in  any  way  aid  the  council  in  re- 
building plant.  In  a  municipal  election  where  nearly  1,000  votes  were  cast  for  the 
purpose  of  ratifying  the  contract  with  the  private  company,  only  34  votes  were  cast 
in  opposition." 

At  that  time  the  total  cost  to  the  village  for  the  lighting  of  the  streets 
(123  arcs),  city  hall  and  other  public  buildings,  together  with  fire  protec- 


62  Defunct    Municipal    Lighting   Plants 

tion  from  81  hydrants  and  water  for  the  public  buildings,  was  less  than 
the  cost  of  operating  the  electric  light  plant  for  an  average  of  90  arcs 
under  the  municipal  regime,  without  any  allowance  for  lost  taxes  and 
depreciation,  the  latter  item  alone  amounting  to  $3,300  a  year. 

WINCHESTER,  TENN.— The  municipal  electric  water  and  light  plant,  in- 
stalled in  1902  at  a  cost  of  $50,000,  has  been  leased.  The  mayor  writes 
under  date  of  July  18 : 

"We  think  a  private  party  can  look  after  the  business  better  than  the  town." 
The  editor  of  Truth,  the  local  paper,  adds  the  following  statement: 

"Before  the  lease  it  was  being  operated  at  an  expense  or  loss — now  it  is  returning 
a  profit." 

WOODSTOCK,  N.  B. — The  following  statement  was  furnished  by  the 
chairman  of  the  finance  committee  of  the  council: 

"The  Woodstock  municipal  lighting  plant  was  installed  in  1882,  at  a  cost  of  ap- 
proximately $20,000,  and  continued  to  serve  the  town  up  to  the  fall  of  1906,  when 
a  contract  was  entered  into  by  the  corporation  with  a  private  concern  generating 
by  water  power.  The  municipal  plant  had  got  in  poor  shape,  and  was  not  giving 
a  satisfactory  service,  and  this,  added  to  the  high  price  of  fuel,  induced  the  cor- 
poration to  accept  the  offer  of  the  private  company,  which  now  has  a  monopoly,  the 
municipal  plant  being  practically  fit  for  the  scrap  heap." 

WYTHEVILLE,  VA. — The  town  installed  a  municipal  electric  plant  in 
1889  at  a  cost  of  $12,000.    The  plant  was  operated  by  the  town  until  it 
was  demonstrated  to  be  a  losing  proposition.     The  old  and  worn  out 
machinery  was  sold  when  a  franchise  was  granted  to  the  private  com-  . 
pany  which  is  now  lighting  the  town. 

XENIA,  OHIO — In  1907  the  mayor  wrote: 

"The  city  of  Xenia  paid  upwards  of  $21,000  for  a  light  plant,  and  the  cost  of 
running  the  same  was  at  the  rate  of  $103  per  lamp.  The  plant  was  badly  run,  the 
operating  of  the  same  being  in  the  hands  of  a  committee  of  councilmen,  who  were 
inexperienced  and,  of  course,  drawing  no  salaries,  did  not  give  it  the  proper  atten- 
tion. All  they  got  out  of  the  sale  of  the  works  was  $2,500.  The  city  afterwards 
entered  into  a  contract  with  a  private  corporation,  and  the  price  now  paid  per  lamp 
is  $63." 

Another  authority  states  that  the  amount  ultimately  invested  in  the 
plant  was  $35,000,  and  that  the  loss  when  it  was  sold,  together  with  the 
excess  cost  of  operation  over  what  the  lighting  would  have  cost  by  con- 
tract, amounted  to  more  than  $90,000 ;  in  other  words,  that  that  sum  rep- 
resents the  cost  of  the  experiment.  The  plant  was  built  in  1882  and  sold 
in  1896. 

In  reply  to  recent  inquiries,  a  citizen  writes : 

"Municipal  ownership  in  Xenia  is  a  dead  letter.  It  is  the  same  old  story.  Poli- 
ticians who  are  good  fellows  and  can  get  votes  as  a  rule  are  not  good  managers— 
that  is,  to  show  a  profit  in  any  municipal  plant." 


THIS  Map  is  published  as  a  supplement  to 
the  ninth  edition   of   Defunct   Municipal 
Lighting    Plants,  a  pamphlet  containing  de- 
tailed accounts  of  the  sale,  lease  or  abandonment 
of  212   municipal   lighting   plants   in   the   United 
States  and  Canada. 

The  Municipal  Ownership  Publishing  Co. 

17  East  38th  Street,  New  York  City 
Nov.  1,  1913 


I 


208  PE 

MUNICIPAL  LIGHTING  Pi 


MUNICIPAL  LjqHTiNQ  PLANTS 
X  INPICATES 


PLANT5    STILL    OPERATING. 


Copyright,  November,  1913,  by  Municipal  Ownership  Publishing  Co. 


JNCT 

NT3  IN  THE  UN1TEP  STATES 


Defunct  Municipal  Lighting  Plants  in  the 
United  States 


Alabama 
Columbia 


Arkansas 
England 
Nashville 


California 
Berkeley 
Gilroy 
Lamoore 
Modesto 

* Santa  Clara 

*Ukiah 


Connecticut 
*Jewett  City 
*  Norwich 


Florida 

West  Tampa 

Georgia 
*Barnesville 

Carrollton 
*Dalton 

Edgwood 
*Forsyth 
*Griffin 

*  Lawrenceville 
*Monticello 

Pelham 
*West  Point 

Idaho 
*Weiser 

Illinois 
*Berwyn 
Braidwood 
Buckley 
Clayton 
Coal  City 
Cuba 
Elgin 
Findlay 
Galena 
Girard 
Hampshire 
Harvard 
Joliet 
Kansas 
Kinmundy 
La  Grange 
Lockport 
Marengo 
Moline 
Neponset 
Pittsfleld 
Princeville 
Sandwich 
Sycamore 
Wheaton 

Indiana 
Bourbon 
Brownstown 
Churubusco 
Dunkirk 
East  Chicago 
English 
Goodland 

*  Cities  which  still  operate  their  distributing  plants. 


Indiana  —  Continued 

Mississippi 

Oklahoma 

Jonesboro 

Ellisville 

Lehigh 

Lowell 

luka 

Madison 
*Marion 

Pontotoc 
Poplarville 

Oregon 

Mentone 

Hillsboro 

Michigan  City 

Lakeview 

Mishawaka 

Missouri 

Montpelier 
Muncie 
New  Carlisle 
Sheridan 
Summitville 
Wabash 
"Walkerton 

Brunswick 
Dexter 
Huntsville 
Lawson 
*St.  Charles 
Savannah 

Pennsylvania 
*Ellwood  City 
Emaus 
Forty  Fort 
Lehighton 
McAdoo 
Philadelphia 

Montana 

Shickshinny 
*Souderton 

10W3. 

Audubon 

Townsend 

West  Newton 

Clarion 
Col  fax 
Delta 
Leon 

Nebraska 
*  University  Place 

South  Carolina 
Batesburg 
*Cheraw 

Lyons 

*Laurens 

Marcus 

Sioux  Rapids 

New  Hampshire 

South  Dakota 

Spirit  Lake 
Tipton 

Peterboro 

Sioux  Falls 

Kansas 
Council  Grove 

New  Jersey 
Allenhurst 

Tennessee 
Dayton 
Huntingdon 

Emporia 

New  York 

*  Lebanon 

Kentucky 
Hickman 

Frankfort 
Gravesend 
Hempstead 

Lewisburg 
South  Pittsburg 
Winchester 

Midway 

Le  Roy 

Murray 

Mohawk 

Texas 

Somerset 

*New  York  tity 

*Fort  Worth 

Waddington 

Honey  Grove 

Louisiana 

^ 

Itaska 

Mansfield 

North  Carolina 

Utah 

Maryland 

Burlington 
*Concord 

*  Pay  son  City 

Rockville 

*Fayetteville 

*Gastonia 

Vermont 

Massachusetts 
Millers  Falls 
Needham 

Goldsboro 
High  Point 
*Lexington 
Mooresville 

*Northfield 
Virginia 

*Statesville 

Alexandria 

Michigan 
Charlotte 
Dexter 
*Escanaba 
*Evart 

Wadesboro 

North  Dakota 
Cassellton 

Buena  Vista 
Christiansburg 
Fredericksbure 
Pulaski 
Wytheville 

*Gladstone 
Grand  Ledge 

Langdon 

Washington 

Hart 

Ballard 

Mendon 

Ohio 

Chehalis 

Richmond 
Romeo 
*  Shelby 
*Shephard 
South  Lyon 
Tawas  City 
Trenton 

Beverly 
Bowling  Green 
Bradford 
Cridersville 
Findlay 
*  Hamilton 
Lake  wood 

Kent 
*Port  Angelis 
Pullman 
Vancouver 
*Waterville 

West  Virginia 

Lisbon 

Harrisville 

Minnesota 

Madisonville 

Shepherdstown 

Delano 
*Duluth 

Milford  Center 
Portsmouth 

Wisconsin 

*East  Grand  Forks 

Tiffin 

*Cuba  City 

Fulda 

Toledo 

Hudson 

Graceville 

Willoughby 

*Lake  Mills 

*Kasota 

Wilmington 

New  Richmond 

*Shakopee 

Xenia 

Wash  burn 

GENERAL  LIBRARY 
UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA— BERKELEY 

RETURN  TO  DESK  FROM  WHICH  BORROWED 

This  book  is  due  on  the  last  date  stamped  below,  or  on  the 

date  to  which  renewed. 
Renewed  books  are  subject  to  immediate  recall. 


|3Jul54VL| 


MOV  2  01977 

'  77 


LD  21-100m-l,'54(1887sI6)476 


UNIVERSITY  OF  CALIFORNIA  LIBRARY 


